DOCSLIB.ORG

A Decision Support System for Investments in Public Transport Infrastructure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto A Decision Support System for Investments in Public Transport Infrastructure Marcos Paulo Schlickmann Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. in Transportation Systems Supervisors: Doctor Luís Miguel Garrido Martínez Prof Doctor Jorge Manuel Pinho de Sousa May 2018 © Marcos Paulo Schlickmann, 2018 ii This thesis is dedicated to Sofia, Gabriel and Rodrigo. iii ABSTRACT When public authorities face the need to improve a transportation system, they normally have to make a difficult choice among a set of technological and operational alternatives. To help the correct evaluation of each alternative and its impacts, costs and benefits, it would be useful to have a decision support system (DSS) based on approaches such as Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) and/or Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA). Among the many impacts caused by a public transportation system, typically those on the land use are not adequately considered in the decision-making processes, mainly because they are hard to monetize, they are often considered as value transfer instead of value creation, and they are too complex to be assessed by traditional transport modeling tools. To overcome these weaknesses, the objectives of this research are to identify and measure the impacts of transit systems on land use and accessibility, and to consider those impacts in decision-making processes, along with more traditional financial and transport related impacts. For this purpose, a DSS, combining a land use and transport model with a MCDA model, was developed. This system was assessed in a small case study, where Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) projects are presented, and in a real case study, the Green Line extension project in Boston, the USA. The DSS incorporates a range of criteria and subcriteria organized in a hierarchical manner, covering a variety of decision aspects, expert opinions and sensitivity and risk analysis. It aims to more accurately, and realistically reflect uncertainties and exogenous conditions that may significantly affect the costs and the benefits of a project. Consequently, it facilitates public debate about investment alternatives, since it makes it possible to present, in a structured way, the decision problem to the affected community and decision-makers. Keywords: BRT; LRT; Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis; Land Use and Transport; Investment analysis iv RESUMO Quando as autoridades públicas enfrentam a necessidade de melhorar um sistema de transporte, têm normalmente de fazer uma escolha difícil entre um conjunto de alternativas tecnológicas e operacionais. Para ajudar a avaliação correta de cada alternativa e seus impactos, custos e benefícios, seria útil contar com um sistema de apoio à decisão (DSS) baseado em abordagens tais como Análise Multicritério (MCDA) e / ou Análise de Custo Benefício (CBA). Entre os muitos impactos causados por um sistema de transporte público, tipicamente aqueles no uso do solo não são adequadamente considerados nos processos de tomada de decisão, principalmente porque são difíceis de monetizar, são geralmente considerados como transferência de valor em vez de criação de valor, e são muito complexos para serem avaliados por ferramentas de modelação de transporte tradicionais. Para superar essas fraquezas, os objetivos desta pesquisa são identificar e medir os impactos dos sistemas de transporte público sobre o uso do solo e a acessibilidade, e considerar esses impactos nos processos de tomada de decisão, juntamente com os impactos financeiros e de transportes mais tradicionais. Para isso, foi desenvolvido um DSS, combinando um modelo de uso do solo e transporte com um modelo MCDA. O DSS foi então aplicado em um pequeno estudo de caso ilustrativo, onde projetos de sistemas Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) e Light Rail Transit (LRT) são apresentados, e depois em um estudo de caso real, o projeto Green Line Extension em Boston, EUA. O DSS incorpora uma série de critérios e subcritérios organizados de forma hierárquica, abrangendo uma variedade de aspectos de decisão, opiniões de especialistas e análises de risco e sensibilidade, de forma precisa e realista, refletindo incertezas e condições exógenas que podem afetar significativamente os custos e os benefícios de um projeto. Consequentemente, facilita o debate público sobre alternativas de investimento, uma vez que permite, de forma estruturada, apresentar o problema de decisão à comunidade afetada e aos decisores. Keywords: BRT; LRT; Análise Multicritério; Uso do solo e transportes; Análise de investimentos v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Ph.D. was a fantastic journey. I met so many interesting and inspiring people. First, I would like to thank my supervisors, Luís Martínez and Jorge Pinho de Sousa. They were great during the entire process. I would also like to thank professor Manuel Matos, Carla Monteiro and all MIT Portugal staff and professors. Second, I would like to thank professor Chris Zegras for hosting me during my stay in Cambridge. I want also to thank lecturer Mikel Murga, lecturer Fred Salvucci, professor Joe Ferreira and MIT friends from Boston BRT and LUTUncertainty projects and MIT staff for welcoming me and helping me with my research during my time at MIT back in 2015. Third, I would like to thank Sebastian, we talked about everything and shared office at MIT. He is a good friend, a friend for life. Cristina, Marco, António Lobo, Teresa and the remainder of my MIT Portugal friends must also receive my acknowledgements. Fourth, I want to thank the experts from various countries who answered my survey. Fifth, I want to thank my family back in Brazil and my in-laws here in Portugal for all the support during this period. Lastly – but most importantly – I want to thank my wife Sofia and my kids Gabriel and Rodrigo, for all the love and support. You are the best things that happened in my life. In addition, I am thankful to FCT for the scholarship SFRH/BD/52001/2012 and to FEUP for being such an incredible school. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................................... iv Resumo ...................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. vi Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... vii Figures ....................................................................................................................................... x Tables ....................................................................................................................................... xii List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................xvi 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Motivation ................................................................................................................. 2 1.2. Objectives .................................................................................................................. 4 1.3. Research questions .................................................................................................... 5 1.4. Research methodology .............................................................................................. 5 2. Capital investment decision-making on Public Transport systems ................................... 9 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 10 2.2. Definition of investment alternatives ...................................................................... 13 2.3. Common decision parameters and aspects ............................................................ 24 2.4. Four-step model ...................................................................................................... 35 2.5. Cost Benefit Analysis ............................................................................................... 37 2.6. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis ............................................................................... 39 2.7. Risk and uncertainty ................................................................................................ 42 2.8. The final choice ........................................................................................................ 45 2.9. Conclusions and further research............................................................................ 46 3. Land use and public transport decision-making .................................................................. 49 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 50 3.2. Accessibility ............................................................................................................. 51 3.3. Mixed-use, density and Transit Oriented Development ......................................... 55 3.4. Property prices and Value Capture mechanisms .................................................... 62 3.5. Forecasting land use changes .................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • A N N U a L R E P O R T a N D a C C O U N

    A N N U a L R E P O R T a N D a C C O U N

    ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS 2008 Front: Railway Crossing over Sado River / Alcácer do Sal ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS 2008 INDEX COMPANY IDENTIFICATION ..................................................................................................................................... 6 GOVERNING BODIES ................................................................................................................................................ 7 ORGANISATIONAL CHART - 2008 ............................................................................................................................ 8 TEIXEIRA DUARTE GROUP ORGANISATIONAL CHART - 2008 .......................................................................... 10 BUSINESS DATA ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 MANAGEMENT REPORT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ................................................................................ 13 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 14 II. ECONOMIC BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 15 III. GLOBAL OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 17 IV. SECTOR ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................
  • Current and Future Ecological Status Assessment: a New Holistic Approach for Watershed Management

    Current and Future Ecological Status Assessment: a New Holistic Approach for Watershed Management

    water Article Current and Future Ecological Status Assessment: A New Holistic Approach for Watershed Management André R. Fonseca 1,* , João A. Santos 1,2 , Simone G.P. Varandas 1,3, Sandra M. Monteiro 1,4, José L. Martinho 5,6 , Rui M.V. Cortes 1,3 and Edna Cabecinha 1,4 1 Centre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences, CITAB, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal; [email protected] (J.A.S.); [email protected] (S.G.P.V.); [email protected] (S.M.M.); [email protected] (R.M.V.C.); [email protected] (E.C.) 2 Departamento de Física, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, UTAD, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal 3 Departamento de Ciências Florestais e Arquitetura Paisagista, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, UTAD, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal 4 Departamento de Biologia e Ambiente, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, UTAD, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal 5 Departamento de Geologia, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, UTAD, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal; [email protected] 6 Geosciences Center, University of Coimbra, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +351-936-168-204 Received: 15 September 2020; Accepted: 8 October 2020; Published: 13 October 2020 Abstract: The Paiva River catchment, located in Portugal, integrates the Natura 2000 network of European Union nature protection areas. Resorting to topography, climate and land-use data, a semi-distributed hydrological model (Hydrological Simulation Program–FORTRAN) was run in order to simulate the hydrological cycle of the river and its tributaries.
  • Rail Baltica Global Project Cost- Benefit Analysis Final Report

    Rail Baltica Global Project Cost- Benefit Analysis Final Report

    Rail Baltica Global Project Cost- Benefit Analysis Final Report 30 April 2017 x Date Table of contents Table of contents ........................................................................................................................ 2 Version ...................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Terms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 3 2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 EY work context ................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Context of the CBA ............................................................................................................ 5 2.3 Key constraints and considerations of the analysis ................................................................ 6 3. Background and information about the project ....................................................................... 8 3.1 Project background and timeline ......................................................................................... 8 3.2 Brief description of the project ........................................................................................... 9 4. Methodology ....................................................................................................................
  • Special Assistance for Project Implementation for Bangkok Mass Transit Development Project in Thailand

    Special Assistance for Project Implementation for Bangkok Mass Transit Development Project in Thailand

    MASS RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY THAILAND SPECIAL ASSISTANCE FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION FOR BANGKOK MASS TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THAILAND FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2010 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY ORIENTAL CONSULTANTS, CO., LTD. EID JR 10-159 MASS RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY THAILAND SPECIAL ASSISTANCE FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION FOR BANGKOK MASS TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THAILAND FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2010 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY ORIENTAL CONSULTANTS, CO., LTD. Special Assistance for Project Implementation for Mass Transit Development in Bangkok Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background of the Study ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Objective of the Study ......................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Scope of the Study............................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Counterpart Agency............................................................................................. 1-3 CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES AND FUTURE PROSPECTS OF MASS TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT IN BANGKOK .............................. 2-1 2.1 Legal Framework and Government Policy.......................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Relevant Agencies....................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2
  • Dynamic Model of the Passenger Flow on Rail Baltica

    Dynamic Model of the Passenger Flow on Rail Baltica

    Proceedings of the 2018 Winter Simulation Conference M. Rabe, A.A. Juan, N. Mustafee, A. Skoogh, S. Jain, and B. Johansson, eds. DYNAMIC MODEL OF THE PASSENGER FLOW ON RAIL BALTICA Juri Tolujew Tobias Reggelin Irina Yatskiv Ilya Jackson Department of Mathematical Methods and Department of Logistics and Material Handling Modelling Systems Transport and Telecommunication Institute Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg Lomonosova Str. 1 Universitätsplatz 2 LV-1019 Riga, LATVIA 39106 Magdeburg, GERMANY ABSTRACT This paper describes the design and application of a model simulating the passenger flows on the high- speed rail line Rail Baltica. The proposed model allows one to define passenger flow service indicators, according to data on the behavior of potential passengers that take the train in different localities along Rail Baltica. If corresponding baseline data is provided and the duration of the longest trip will not exceed one day, the model can be used to study processes on other railways with a similar structure. The developed model simulates movements and accumulation of passengers at stations and in trains on four sections connecting five cities along Rail Baltica. Besides that, the model allows for studying particular scenarios related to large sports or other events that will take place near one or several cities through which the railway passes. 1 INTRODUCTION Rail Baltica is a project to construct a high-speed railway that will link up the Baltic states Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia with Central European countries. As the result of the “Rail Baltica I” stage, a standard-gauge railway with a track gauge of 1,435 mm will be built.
  • SPEEDLINES, HSIPR Committee, Issue

    SPEEDLINES, HSIPR Committee, Issue

    High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail SPEEDLINES JULY 2017 ISSUE #21 2 CONTENTS SPEEDLINES MAGAZINE 3 HSIPR COMMITTEE CHAIR LETTER 5 APTA’S HS&IPR ROI STUDY Planes, trains, and automobiles may have carried us through the 7 VIRGINIA VIEW 20th century, but these days, the future buzz is magnetic levitation, autonomous vehicles, skytran, jet- 10 AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES packs, and zip lines that fit in a backpack. 15 MAGLEV » p.15 18 HYPERLOOP On the front cover: Futuristic visions of transport systems are unlikely to 20 SPOTLIGHT solve our current challenges, it’s always good to dream. Technology promises cleaner transportation systems for busy metropolitan cities where residents don’t have 21 CASCADE CORRIDOR much time to spend in traffic jams. 23 USDOT FUNDING TO CALTRAINS CHAIR: ANNA BARRY VICE CHAIR: AL ENGEL SECRETARY: JENNIFER BERGENER OFFICER AT LARGE: DAVID CAMERON 25 APTA’S 2017 HSIPR CONFERENCE IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR: PETER GERTLER EDITOR: WENDY WENNER PUBLISHER: AL ENGEL 29 LEGISLATIVE OUTLOOK ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER: KENNETH SISLAK ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER: ERIC PETERSON LAYOUT DESIGNER: WENDY WENNER 31 NY PENN STATION RENEWAL © 2011-2017 APTA - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED SPEEDLINES is published in cooperation with: 32 GATEWAY PROGRAM AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION 1300 I Street NW, Suite 1200 East Washington, DC 20005 35 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS “The purpose of SPEEDLINES is to keep our members and friends apprised of the high performance passenger rail envi- ronment by covering project and technology developments domestically and globally, along with policy/financing break- throughs. Opinions expressed represent the views of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of APTA nor its High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Committee.” 4 Dear HS&IPR Committee & Friends : I am pleased to continue to the newest issue of our Committee publication, the acclaimed SPEEDLINES.
  • Integration of Renewable Energies for Trolleybus and Mini-Bus Lines in Coimbra

    Integration of Renewable Energies for Trolleybus and Mini-Bus Lines in Coimbra

    Page 0863 World Electric Vehicle Journal Vol. 3 - ISSN 2032-6653 - © 2009 AVERE EVS24 Stavanger, Norway, May 13-16, 2009 Integration of Renewable Energies for Trolleybus and Mini-Bus Lines in Coimbra Aníbal T. de Almeida1, Carlos Inverno1, Luís Santos2 1Dep. Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Coimbra, [email protected] 2Coimbra Municipality Urban Transport Services Abstract Trolleybuses and electric mini-buses in the Portuguese city of Coimbra are one of the main forms of daily transportation of its many citizens. As part of CIVITAS MODERN European Project MObility, Development and Energy use ReductioN, one of its main objectives for Coimbra is the integration of clean production electricity system owned by the City Council, able to supply the energy to the trolleybus traction lines, plus electric energy to charge the batteries of the electric mini-buses fleet. This electric fleet is undergoing a significant expansion in the near future. A study was carried out in order to evaluate the potential of renewable energy production to supply the electric fleet public transportation in Coimbra, reducing the necessity of fossil fuels and associated emissions, therefore improving the air quality. The electricity source will be a low head hydro potential, using an already existing dam-bridge, where a group of turbine-generators units can be placed, with modest operation costs and reduced civil works with small environmental impact. The optimization of the renewable energy generation is also assessed as a function of the load profiles. Keywords: Trolleybus lines, public transport, electric vehicles, energy consumption, emissions reduction, hydropower transportation system by implementing several 1 Introduction measures as part of the concept of sustainable mobility.
  • Annual Report

    Annual Report

    ANNUAL REPORT 2010 WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f Cover: Douro Litoral Motorway WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f Annual Report 2010 WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f Table of Contents COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 4 GOVERNING BODIES 5 ORGANOGRAM - 2010 6 TEIXEIRA DUARTE GROUP - 2010 8 SUMMARY OF INDICATORS 10 MANAGEMENT REPORT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 11 I. INTRODUCTION 12 II. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 13 III. GENERAL OVERVIEW 13 IV. SECTOR ANALYSIS 22 IV.1. CONSTRUCTION 23 IV.2. CEMENT, CONCRETE AND AGGREGATES 31 IV.3. CONCESSIONS AND SERVICES 33 IV.4. REAL ESTATE 39 IV.5. HOTEL SERVICES 44 IV.6. DISTRIBUTION 47 IV.7. ENERGY 49 IV.8. AUTOMOBILE 52 V. HOLDINGS IN LISTED COMPANIES 54 VI. EVENTS AFTER THE END OF THE REPORTING PERIOD 55 VII. OUTLOOK FOR THE FINANTIAL YEAR 2011 55 VIII. DISTRIBUTION TO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 55 IX. PROPOSAL FOR THE APPROPRIATION OF PROFIT 56 NOTES TO THE MANAGEMENT REPORT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 57 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REPORT - 2010 59 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 129 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 143 REPORTS, OPINIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS OF THE AUDIT BODIES 205 WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f 3 Teixeira Duarte, S.A. Head Office: Lagoas Park, Edifício 2 - 2740-265 Porto Salvo Share Capital: € 420,000,000 Single Legal Person and Registration number 509.234.526 at the Commercial Registry of Cascais (Oeiras) WorldReginfo - 6e6c6c6f-90a8-46f2-8295-ba752863773f 4 Governing Bodies Board OF THE GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS Chairman Mr. Rogério Paulo Castanho Alves Deputy Chairman Mr. José Gonçalo Pereira de Sousa Guerra Constenla Secretary Mr.
  • Issue #30, March 2021

    Issue #30, March 2021

    High-Speed Intercity Passenger SPEEDLINESMarch 2021 ISSUE #30 Moynihan is a spectacular APTA’S CONFERENCE SCHEDULE » p. 8 train hall for Amtrak, providing additional access to Long Island Railroad platforms. Occupying the GLOBAL RAIL PROJECTS » p. 12 entirety of the superblock between Eighth and Ninth Avenues and 31st » p. 26 and 33rd Streets. FRICTIONLESS, HIGH-SPEED TRANSPORTATION » p. 5 APTA’S PHASE 2 ROI STUDY » p. 39 CONTENTS 2 SPEEDLINES MAGAZINE 3 CHAIRMAN’S LETTER On the front cover: Greetings from our Chair, Joe Giulietti INVESTING IN ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY AND ENERGY-EFFICIENT HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECTS WILL CREATE HIGHLY SKILLED JOBS IN THE TRANS- PORTATION INDUSTRY, REVITALIZE DOMESTIC 4 APTA’S CONFERENCE INDUSTRIES SUPPLYING TRANSPORTATION PROD- UCTS AND SERVICES, REDUCE THE NATION’S DEPEN- DENCY ON FOREIGN OIL, MITIGATE CONGESTION, FEATURE ARTICLE: AND PROVIDE TRAVEL CHOICES. 5 MOYNIHAN TRAIN HALL 8 2021 CONFERENCE SCHEDULE 9 SHARED USE - IS IT THE ANSWER? 12 GLOBAL RAIL PROJECTS 24 SNIPPETS - IN THE NEWS... ABOVE: For decades, Penn Station has been the visible symbol of official disdain for public transit and 26 FRICTIONLESS HIGH-SPEED TRANS intercity rail travel, and the people who depend on them. The blight that is Penn Station, the new Moynihan Train Hall helps knit together Midtown South with the 31 THAILAND’S FIRST PHASE OF HSR business district expanding out from Hudson Yards. 32 AMTRAK’S BIKE PROGRAM CHAIR: JOE GIULIETTI VICE CHAIR: CHRIS BRADY SECRETARY: MELANIE K. JOHNSON OFFICER AT LARGE: MICHAEL MCLAUGHLIN 33
  • Rail Baltica Final Report Executive Summary

    Rail Baltica Final Report Executive Summary

    Transportation May 2011 Rail Baltica Final Report Executive Summary Prepared by: ............................................................. Checked by: ........................................................................ P Constable A Kakulis Deputy Project Manager Local Project Coordinator Approved by: ............................................................. M Elton Project Manager Rail Baltica Final Report Rev No Comments Checked by Approved Date by 1 Final Report v2 AK PC 31/05/11 Saxon House, 27 Duke Street, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 1HT Telephone: 01245 771200 Website: http://www.aecom.com Job No Reference Date Created May 2011 This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited for the sole use of our client (the “Client”) and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM Limited and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM Limited, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM Limited. c:\backup\my documents\documents\aecom\aecom lv\projects\rail baltica\project administration\final report\submittal v2\executive summary\rail_baltica_final_report_executive_summary_31_05_11 final v2.doc Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................
  • The Transportation Challenge MOVING the U.S

    The Transportation Challenge MOVING the U.S

    The Transportation Challenge MOVING THE U.S. ECONOMY Prepared for National Chamber Foundation Prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Boston Logistics Group, Inc. Alan E. Pisarski Acknowledgment and Use This work was prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. under contract to the National Chamber Foun- dation® of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This material is privileged and confidential and may not be used without the permission of the National Chamber Foundation. Disclaimer The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in the report are those of the research agency. They are nor necessarily those of the National Chamber Foundation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. © Copyright 2008 T H E TransportationCHALLENGE MOVING THE U.S. ECONOMY SECTION TITLE PAGE NUMBER 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................ 4 Background ................................................................................................................... 4 Purpose and Structure of Report ........................................................................................................... 6 The Linkages Between Transportation Investment and Economic Growth .................................................... 7 2.0 The Economy and Transportation ......................................... 12 Changing U.S. Economy ........................................................................................................................ 12 Changing U.S. Freight and Logistics Systems .........................................................................................
  • Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making

    Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making

    Project No: FTA-VA-26-7222-2004.1 Federal United States Transit Department of August 2004 Administration Transportation CharacteristicsCharacteristics ofof BusBus RapidRapid TransitTransit forfor Decision-MakingDecision-Making Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES August 2004 COVERED BRT Demonstration Initiative Reference Document 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making 6. AUTHOR(S) Roderick B. Diaz (editor), Mark Chang, Georges Darido, Mark Chang, Eugene Kim, Donald Schneck, Booz Allen Hamilton Matthew Hardy, James Bunch, Mitretek Systems Michael Baltes, Dennis Hinebaugh, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Lawrence Wnuk, Fred Silver, Weststart - CALSTART Sam Zimmerman, DMJM + Harris 8.