DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 132

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 132 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 132 / Monday, July 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 42529 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION other passengers in ``light rail'' vehicles. the comment period on this statement This development holds great promise (64 FR 58124). Then, based on a request Federal Railroad Administration for enhancing transportation from the major organization alternatives in metropolitan and representing rail commuter and transit 49 CFR Parts 209 and 211 suburban areas. However, this shared operations, we extended the comment [FRA Docket No. FRA±1999±5685, Notice use of conventional rail lines, which are deadline again, to February 14, 2000. No. 7] within FRA's broad safety jurisdiction, We think this public process gave all also poses some significant safety concerned ample opportunity to RIN 2130±AB33 issues. FTA provides a substantial share develop and convey their views, and we of the funding for many of these have spent a great deal of time Statement of Agency Policy passenger operations, some of which reviewing the many comments we Concerning Jurisdiction Over the straddle the jurisdictional line between received. Safety of Railroad Passenger FRA's and FTA's statutory safety I. Discussion of Comments Operations and Waivers Related to authority. Therefore, FRA and FTA have Shared Use of the Tracks of the decided to explain jointly, in a notice FRA received nearly 50 responses General Railroad System by Light Rail published elsewhere in today's Federal concerning its proposed statement of and Conventional Equipment Register, how they will work to ensure agency policy, including comments AGENCY: Federal Railroad that they exercise jurisdiction in a from: state and local governments and Administration (FRA), Department of complementary way over these shared transportation authorities; transit Transportation (DOT). use operations. In this notice, FRA agencies; transportation planners and explains in greater detail the extent of consultants; citizen groups; a railroad ACTION: Final rule and policy statement. its safety jurisdiction and how it will labor union; the association SUMMARY: FRA and the Federal Transit exercise that authority in the shared use representing the interests of Administration (FTA) have jointly context. FRA also explains how those conventional railroads; and the developed a policy concerning safety light rail operations that may desire association representing the interests of issues related to light rail transit waivers of certain of FRA's rules may go the rail transit industry. Discussions operations that share use of the general about seeking such waivers. follow with respect to the primary railroad system track with conventional This notice does not amend any of issues raised by the commenters. In trains. That policy, published elsewhere FRA's substantive safety rules or impose light of the comments received, FRA has in today's Federal Register, describes any regulatory burdens not already reconsidered some aspects of its how the two agencies will coordinate imposed by those rules. Those rules proposed policy and has elected to use of their respective safety authorities cover a wide range of safety issues such adopt certain portions of the policy over shared track operations. FRA is as equipment, track, signals, grade without substantive change from what FRA proposed. issuing its own separate policy crossings, and operating practices. By The commenters addressed many of statement to describe the extent of its their own terms, they already apply to at least those rail operations, like those the important topics discussed in FRA's statutory jurisdiction over railroad proposal, including the extent and passenger operations (which covers all addressed here, that occur on lines where conventional trains operate. exercise of FRA's jurisdiction, shared railroads except urban rapid transit use of the general railroad system of operations not connected to the general Nothing in this statement expands the applicability provisions of those rules. transportation by light rail and railroad system) and explain how it will conventional rail equipment, shared use exercise that jurisdiction. The statement The only rules that FRA is amending are its statement of policy on safety of railroad rights of way by light rail and also explains FRA's waiver process and conventional rail equipment, and the discusses factors that should be jurisdiction, found in appendix A to 49 CFR part 209, and 49 CFR part 211, to nature of the waiver process involving addressed in any petition submitted by which FRA is adding a new appendix shared-use operations. Several light rail operators and other railroads containing its statement of policy commenters applauded the agencies' seeking approval of shared use of concerning waivers related to shared efforts to clarify how FRA and FTA will general railroad system track. use of the general system. FRA believes exercise their respective authorities and DATES: This statement of policy is it is important to ensure that the provide guidance on how to use FRA's effective July 10, 2000. agency's current thinking on these waiver process in this context. Many FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: subjects can be readily located in the commenters had suggestions on how Daniel C. Smith, Assistant Chief CFR. FRA could improve its expression of its Counsel for Safety, FRA, RCC±10, 1120 Although agencies are not required to policy, and a few simply opposed FRA's Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 10, provide notice and an opportunity to exercise of its jurisdiction, whether Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202± comment on interpretive rules and generally over light rail operations on 493±6029) or David H. Kasminoff, Trial statements of policy, FRA did so here to the general system or specifically over Attorney, FRA, RCC±12, 1120 Vermont ensure that it had the benefit of the their own operation. The major themes Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 10, views of interested parties in developing that emerged from FRA's review of the Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202± its policy. Because of the substantial comments are as follows: 493±6043). overlap in subject matter between FRA's • FRA's proposed definitional proposed statement of policy (published distinction between ``commuter Introduction November 1, 1999, at 64 FR 59046) and railroad'' and ``rapid transit,'' which DOT strongly encourages increased the joint FRA/FTA statement (published involves determining the primary use of railroads to serve the nation's May 25, 1999, at 64 FR 28238), we purpose of the operation and whether a passenger transportation needs. Many concluded it made sense to have the substantial portion of the operation is communities are using or planning to comment periods on both statements devoted to moving people within a use railroad lines on which run concurrently. Therefore, we city's boundaries, is viewed by some conventional freight and passenger extended the original comment period commenters as improperly based in trains operate to move commuters and on the joint statement to coincide with FRA's statutory authority or too vague. VerDate 11<MAY>2000 15:24 Jul 07, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10JYR6.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 10JYR6 42530 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 132 / Monday, July 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations • FRA should establish an transit system over which conventional insufficient that FRA legally does not administrative process to resolve passenger or freight trains operate. even ``have'' the jurisdiction over the jurisdictional questions, especially The NSWG notes that its suggested rapid transit system that FRA says it is those involving light rail projects still in changes to the policy statement do not choosing not to ``exercise.'' the planning stages. ``offer a different view of FRA's In response, FRA notes that its final • The ``proposed restrictions'' jurisdiction than the one FRA itself statement of agency policy concerning (apparently some commenters did not offers.'' Instead, NSWG takes issue with jurisdiction included in Appendix A to realize that FRA's rules already apply to particular aspects of how FRA has part 209 of the CFR, as amended by this these operations) on shared use of the expressed its jurisdictional reach. notice, is perfectly clear as to where same trackage by light rail and NSWG contests FRA's suggestion that FRA believes it lacks jurisdiction. conventional rail equipment are ``urban rapid transit'' is an exception to Nothing FRA has said suggests that FRA unjustified because of added or special category of ``commuter and could exercise jurisdiction it does not compliance costs and the possible other short-haul railroad passenger have. Moreover, it is correct in literal discouraging effect on the development operations'' instead of a completely terms to say that FRA does not exercise and expansion of light rail transit separate category over which FRA lacks jurisdiction where it either lacks service. Certain commenters asked FRA jurisdiction. The commenter does not jurisdiction or chooses not to exercise it, to emulate what they understand as the wish to see the final policy statement and it is sometimes useful in certain European approach and permit imply a presumption that a rail contexts to combine those two simultaneous joint use of the same operation is automatically a commuter categories to give the reader a clear trackage by light rail and freight trains. or short-haul operation under FRA's picture of what FRA believes is outside jurisdiction unless it is an exceptional • The shared-use waiver petition of both the extent and exercise of its and special type of short-haul operation. process is too burdensome to transit jurisdiction. For example, most of FRA's FRA appreciates NSWG's close reading rules contain an applicability section system operators. of 49 U.S.C. 20102, but believes that • that, among other things, excludes FRA needs to explain its regulatory reading would not produce role in cases of a light rail transit urban rapid transit systems not jurisdictional conclusions different from connected to the general system, but operation sharing a right-of-way but no those rendered under FRA's reading.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newyel Newyellow Line Connector FAQS
    New Yellow Line Connector New Yellow Line Connector FAQS How will the New Yellow Line Connector impact your commute? The Yellow Line Connector will be operated by the both the Interurban Trolley and Transpo, with a new connection point at the Mishawaka Transfer Center. Existing Transpo Route 9 will end at the Mishawaka Transfer Center. 30 minute service will be provided along 30 MONDAY the whole route between downtown Min to FRIDAY Mishawaka and downtown Elkhart Monday through Friday. This equates to a doubling of service, during the weekdays, on the route east of Bittersweet Road. Existing Service Up to 41 minutes at South Street Up to 35 minutes at Elkhart UpStation to 15 minutes or Twin at Branch Transfer Center South Street Station or Mishawaka TC 15 minutes at 5 minutes at Riders will see a reduction in waiting time Mishawaka Elkhart Proposed Service Transfer Transfer for transfers during the weekday. Center Center 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Wait Time (minutes) For additional resources, visit www.interurbantrolley.com/yellow_line New Yellow Line Connector FAQS FAQS How will the fare structure change? Interurban Trolley and Transpo reduced fares will be available at all times, even peak hour. $3 day passes for either the Interurban Trolley or Transpo system will be oered on all Yellow Line Connector buses. All Interurban Trolley or Transpo Bus Passes will be accepted on the Yellow Line Connector Route If a rider plans to continue their transit trip past downtown Elkhart or Mishawaka, an additional fare may be needed. Children under 4 years old ride free on the Yellow Line Connector, and all Interurban Trolley buses.
    [Show full text]
  • The Urban Rail Development Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT THE “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook offers both planners and political decision makers a comprehensive view of one of the largest, if not the largest, investment a city can undertake: an urban rail system. The handbook properly recognizes that urban rail is only one part of a hierarchically integrated transport system, and it provides practical guidance on how urban rail projects can be implemented and operated RAIL URBAN THE URBAN RAIL in a multimodal way that maximizes benefits far beyond mobility. The handbook is a must-read for any person involved in the planning and decision making for an urban rail line.” —Arturo Ardila-Gómez, Global Lead, Urban Mobility and Lead Transport Economist, World Bank DEVELOPMENT “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook tackles the social and technical challenges of planning, designing, financing, procuring, constructing, and operating rail projects in urban areas. It is a great complement HANDBOOK to more technical publications on rail technology, infrastructure, and project delivery. This handbook provides practical advice for delivering urban megaprojects, taking account of their social, institutional, and economic context.” —Martha Lawrence, Lead, Railway Community of Practice and Senior Railway Specialist, World Bank HANDBOOK “ Among the many options a city can consider to improve access to opportunities and mobility, urban rail stands out by its potential impact, as well as its high cost. Getting it right is a complex and multifaceted challenge that this handbook addresses beautifully through an in-depth and practical sharing of hard lessons learned in planning, implementing, and operating such urban rail lines, while ensuring their transformational role for urban development.” —Gerald Ollivier, Lead, Transit-Oriented Development Community of Practice, World Bank “ Public transport, as the backbone of mobility in cities, supports more inclusive communities, economic development, higher standards of living and health, and active lifestyles of inhabitants, while improving air quality and liveability.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxicab Franchise Ordinance
    ORDINANCE NO. 3964 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA ADDING CHAPTER 6-87, TAXICAB SERVICES TO THE SANTA ROSA CITY CODE THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 6-87 is added to the Santa Rosa City Code to read in full as follows: “CHAPTER 6-87 TAXICAB SERVICES SECTIONS: 6-87.010 FINDINGS AND PURPOSE 6-87.020 DEFINITIONS 6-87.030 AUTHORITY TO ISSUE RULES AND REGULATIONS 6-87.040 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 6-87.050 REQUIREMENT OF FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 6-87.060 GRANTING OF NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 6-87.070 FRANCHISE TERMS AND CONDITIONS 6-87.080 SUPERVISION AUTHORITY 6-87.090 TERMINATION OF FRANCHISE 6-87.100 APPEAL OF FRANCHISE DENIAL OR TERMINATION 6-87.110 RATES, FEES AND CHARGES 6-87.120 FAILURE TO OBTAIN FRANCHISE AGREEMENT - VIOLATION 6-87.130 ZONING CLEARANCE REQUIRED 6-87.140 INDEMNIFICATION OF CITY 6-87.150 VEHICLE PERMIT APPLICATION 6-87.160 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION 6-87.170 EQUIPMENT AND CONDITIONS 6-87.180 VEHICLE MARKINGS AND INSIGNIA 6-87.190 COMMERCIAL SIGNS AND ADVERTISEMENTS 6-87.200 VEHICLE INSPECTION 6-87.210 SALE OR TRANSFER OF BUSINESS 6-87.220 TRANSFER OF VEHICLE 6-87.230 SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF VEHICLE PERMIT 6-87.240 TAXI DRIVER PERMIT APPLICATION 6-87.250 DRIVER PERMIT 6-87.260 CONTENTS OF DRIVER PERMIT 6-87.270 SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF DRIVER’S PERMIT 6-87.280 NUMBER OF PERMITS 6-87.290 REPLACEMENT OF LOST OR DESTROYED PERMITS 6-87.300 CHANGE OF EMPLOYMENT BY DRIVER Ord.
    [Show full text]
  • New High-Speed Rail Lines and Small Cities: Locating the Station
    © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: The Sustainable City II, CA Brebbia, JF Martin-Duque & LC Wadhwa (Editors). ISBN 1-85312-917-8 New high-speed rail lines and small cities: locating the station J,M. Menendez’, B. Guirao’, J.M. Coronado*, A. Rivas’, F.J, Rodriguezi, C. Ribalaygua3, & J.M Urefia2 IDepartment of Transportation, 2Department of Urban planning, 3 Department of Graphic Designj Castilla-La Manchu University, Spain Abstract This paper studies the effects of high-speed railway stations, mainly on urban development of small size cities. For this purpose, we have analyzed twelve European cases and they have been sorted into different groups depending on the station location related to the city. Three categories have been defined: central station, edge station, and external station. As a result of this, for each group of European stations advantages and disadvantages, in terms of urban development and mobility, have been detected. This report will help planners to define some criteria to design and locate new high-speed railway stations in small size cities. 1 Study targets Up to now, the main target of new high-speed lines has been connecting two big population areas which size justifies the public investment required for its construction. But also, small and medium size cities are generally included in interior points of these lines. In these small cities, the new infrastructure is perceived as an important tool for the economic development and urban dynamism, and this is why local authorities must find the way to adapt the city to its new situation, in order to get the maximum benefit from it.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of U.S. Commuter Rail
    AN OVERVIEW OF U.S. COMMUTER RAIL Timothy J. Brock, MA Reginald R. Souleyrette, PhD, PE KTC-13-18/UTCNURAIL1-12-1F This research was sponsored by: The NuRail Center National University Transportation Center and The Kentucky Transportation Center University of Kentucky Cover Photo: Tri-Rail System in Miami, Florida By: Timothy J. Brock Date: April, 2011 Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Dr. Ted Grossardt and Dr. Len O’Connell for their comments on earlier drafts. They would also like to thank the participants in the Cities, Transportation and Sustainability session at the Association of American Geographers annual meeting for the thoughtful discussion and comments on this research. Disclaimer: 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 official views or policies of the Kentucky Transportation Center or of the NuRail Center. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. ii AN OVERVIEW OF U.S. COMMUTER RAIL Timothy J. Brock, M.A. Research Associate Kentucky Transportation Center University of Kentucky and Reginald R. Souleyrette, Ph.D., P.E. Professor of Transportation Engineering and Commonwealth Chair College of Engineering University of Kentucky FINAL REPORT May 2nd, 2013 © 2013 University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center Information may not be used, reproduced, or republished without our written consent. iii 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No KTC-13-18/UTCNURAIL1-12-1F 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date May 2013 AN OVERVIEW OF U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Horsecars: City Transit Before the Age of Electricity by John H
    Horsecars: City Transit Before the Age of Electricity by John H. White, Jr. Horsecars were the earliest form of city rail transit. One or two horses propelled light, boxy tram cars over tracks buried in the streets. Only the tops of the iron rails could be seen; the rest of the track structure was below the surface of the pavement. The rails offered a smooth, low-friction surface so that a heavy load could be propelled with a minimal power source. The cars moved slowly at rarely more than six miles per hour. They were costly to operate and rarely ventured much beyond the city limits. There was no heat in the winter nor air-conditioning in the summer. Lighting was so dim that reading was impossible after sunset. Horsecars were in all ways low-tech and old wave, yet they worked and moved millions of passengers each day. They were indispensable to urban life. The public became enthralled with riding and would not walk unless the cars stopped running. Horsecars were a fixture in American city life between about 1860 and 1900. Even the smallest city had at least one horsecar line. Grand Street, New York, at Night, 1889. From Harper’s Weekly. Basic Statistics for U.S. Street Railways in 1881 Millions on the Move 415 street railways in operation 18,000 cars The earliest cities were designed for walking. Everything clustered around 100,000 horses 150,000 tons of hay consumed each year the town square. Churches, shops, taverns, schools were all next to one another. 11,000,000 bushels of grain consumed each year Apartments and homes were a few blocks away.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Transit in Southeast Michigan
    History of Transit in Southeast Michigan 1800s 1860 ‐ The population of Detroit is about 50,000 and the land area of the city is 12.7 square miles. 1862 ‐ A Syracuse, New York based company forms the Detroit City Railway Company and begins construction of what would be Detroit’s first passenger rail system. 1863 ‐ Detroit’s first passenger rail system, horse‐drawn trolleys, begins service on Jefferson Avenue on August 3, 1863. The initial service ran from Elmwood to Randolph. The fare was 5 cents or 25 tickets for a dollar. On August 27, 1863 service began on Woodward Avenue, on September 12, 1863 service began on Gratiot Avenue and on November 25, 1863 service began on Michigan Avenue. All of the lines converged at Jefferson and Woodward Avenues. 1892 ‐ On August 22, 1892 the Detroit Citizens Street Railway succeeds the Detroit City Railway and begins to offer electric powered streetcar service along Jefferson Avenue. Electric streetcars replace the horse‐drawn trolley on Woodward and Mack by the end of the year. 1895 ‐ Due to the improved power electric streetcar service expands into the suburbs. 1900 ‐ 1950 1900 ‐ The population of Detroit is 285,704 and the land area of the city is 28.3 square miles. The population of the tri‐county region is 426,829 1901 ‐ The DUR (Detroit United Railway) is formed by a Cleveland syndicate from six Detroit area interurban operations. 1910 ‐ The population of Detroit is 465,766 and the land area of Detroit is 39.3 square miles. The population of the tri‐county region is 613,773.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future for Interurban Passenger Transport
    The future for interurban passenger transport M a d r i d Bringing citizens closer together 1 8 t h International Symposium on Transport Economics and Policy The future for interurban passenger transport Bringing citizens closer together Economic growth, trade and the concentration of population in large cities will intensify demand for interurban transport services. Concurrently, the need to manage environmental impacts effectively will increase. How successful we are in coping with demand will depend on our ability to innovate, to manage congestion, and The future to improve the quality of transport services. Technological and regulatory innovation will shape the future of transport. The Symposium brought together leading transport researchers from for interurban around the world to explore the future for interurban passenger transport. A first set of papers investigates what drives demand for interurban passenger transport and infers how it may evolve in the passenger future. The remaining papers investigate transport policy issues that emerge as key challenges: when to invest in high-speed rail, how to regulate to ensure efficient operation, how to assign infrastructure to transport different types of users, and how to control transport’s environmental footprint by managing modal split and improving modal performance. Bringing citizens closer together www.internationaltransportforum.org www.oecd.org/publishing -:HSTCSC=VUW[Z\: (74 2010 02 1 P) ISBN 978-92-821-0265-7 2010 18th International Symposium on Transport Economics and Policy 16-18 November 2009 MADRID The future for interurban passenger transport Bringing citizens closer together ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • TCQSM Part 8
    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2nd Edition PART 8 GLOSSARY This part of the manual presents definitions for the various transit terms discussed and referenced in the manual. Other important terms related to transit planning and operations are included so that this glossary can serve as a readily accessible and easily updated resource for transit applications beyond the evaluation of transit capacity and quality of service. As a result, this glossary includes local definitions and local terminology, even when these may be inconsistent with formal usage in the manual. Many systems have their own specific, historically derived, terminology: a motorman and guard on one system can be an operator and conductor on another. Modal definitions can be confusing. What is clearly light rail by definition may be termed streetcar, semi-metro, or rapid transit in a specific city. It is recommended that in these cases local usage should prevail. AADT — annual average daily ATP — automatic train protection. AADT—accessibility, transit traffic; see traffic, annual average ATS — automatic train supervision; daily. automatic train stop system. AAR — Association of ATU — Amalgamated Transit Union; see American Railroads; see union, transit. Aorganizations, Association of American Railroads. AVL — automatic vehicle location system. AASHTO — American Association of State AW0, AW1, AW2, AW3 — see car, weight Highway and Transportation Officials; see designations. organizations, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. absolute block — see block, absolute. AAWDT — annual average weekday traffic; absolute permissive block — see block, see traffic, annual average weekday. absolute permissive. ABS — automatic block signal; see control acceleration — increase in velocity per unit system, automatic block signal.
    [Show full text]
  • INTERURBAN COACH ROUTES Burnet Bertram CARTS at PLAZA SALTILLO 281 183 5Th & Comal, 412 Comal St
    FULL TICKETING BUS STATIONS 1512 INTERURBAN COACH ROUTES Burnet Bertram CARTS AT PLAZA SALTILLO 281 183 5th & Comal, 412 Comal St. Austin, TX 78702 1510 Interurban Coach IH 35 35 Liberty Hill 1511 Interurban Coach IH 35 Georgetown AUSTIN GREYHOUND STATION 1514 1512 Interurban Coach HWY 183 Marble Falls 79 916 E. Koenig Lane, Austin, TX 78751 Taylor Capital Area Rural Transportation System 1514 Taylor Interurban Coach HWY 79 Hutto Cedar Park Round Rock BASTROP CARTS STATION 1516 Interurban Coach HWY 183 310 Hospital Dr., Bastrop, TX 78602 1517 Interurban Coach Tx State Exp. IH 35 Pflugerville 1518 Interurban Coach HWY 71 1511 Elgin GEORGETOWN CARTS STATION 290 INTERURBAN COACH ROUTES 1519 Interurban Coach HWY 71 Manor 1520 Austin 3620 S. Austin Ave., Georgetown, TX 78626 1520 Interurban Coach HWY 290 GEORGETOWN LIBRARY AUSTIN Southpark CARTS Stations 71 Paige 402 W 8th St, Georgetown, TX 78626 Meadows BASTROP Garfield 1518 Giddings Other Stops ROUND ROCK TRANSIT CENTER 1519 BERTRAM 35 Bastrop 300 West Bagdad Ave., Round Rock, TX 78664 Metro Stations 1510 183 BURNET Greyhound Station Smithville 290 CAPITAL METRO SAN MARCOS CARTS STATION 1517 338 S. Guadalupe, San Marcos, TX 78666 71 ELGIN For More Information 6th St. La Grange Lockhart RideCARTS.com 7th St. GEORGETOWN SMITHVILLE CARTS STATION San Marcos Plaza 300 Northeast Loop 230, Smithville, TX 78957 512/478 RIDE (7433) Saltillo CARTS Austin @ 6th GIDDINGS 1516 Cesar Chavez 35 GREYHOUND TAYLOR CARTS STATION Comal St. 1103 W. 2nd St., Taylor, TX 76574 Luling HUTTO LIBERTY HILL MARBLE FALLS
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Railways
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: The Transportation Industries, 1889-1946: A Study of Output, Employment, and Productivity Volume Author/Editor: Harold Barger Volume Publisher: NBER Volume ISBN: 0-87014-050-7 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/barg51-1 Publication Date: 1951 Chapter Title: Electric Railways Chapter Author: Harold Barger Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c3191 Chapter pages in book: (p. 112 - 122) Chapter 5 Electric Railways The term 'electric railways' includes Street and interurban railway systems and city subways but does not cover the electrified divisions of steam railroads. The industry carries vast numbers of short distance passengers. Although they have numbered ten to twenty times those carried by steam railroads, neither the revenues nor the employees of electric railways have ever exceeded one-fifth the corresponding figure for steam railroads. The first streetcars were drawn by animals. Cable systems were installed as early as 1873. Electric traction, introduced in 1884, had superseded all other types of motive power by 1907. The electrification of existing Street railways was accompanied, espe- cially during the first decade of this century, by the construction of interurban roads and city subways.1 The industry reached a peak in passengers, revenues and em- ployees shortly after World War I. Thereafter the competition of the motorbus -andprivate automobile bit deeply into electric railway operations. The story therefore resembles that of steam railroads, except that electric railways started much later and rose more rapidly to prominence, and after their peak — declinedmore sharply.2 See Census of Street and Electric Railways, 1902 and 1907.
    [Show full text]
  • 04-108 Interurban Rail Trail at Prospect Lake Road Sign.Indd
    4""/*$) 2:17 centennial trails interurban rail trail W Int Gowlland Tod er u L Provincal rb o To Swartz Bay/Sidney a c n Park h Swartz Bay – Tsawwassen Ferry R s a 17 i Sidney – Anacortes Ferry i d l Bear Hill Road e T r R a i e l SAANICH continues to have a long-standing belief in the value of trails g i o W n a Durrance a l la l and greenways dating back to the 1960’s. The Centennial Trails plans build Lake c T e Bear Hill r D a r i Regional i ve l Park upon the successes of existing trails and greenways such as the Colquitz Willis Po int R oad Brookleigh Road Oldfield Road rd Saywa River Park, the Galloping Goose Regional Trail, the Lochside Regional Trail, Road Lochside The Corporation Park d and many neighbourhood trails. a o R e c Hartland n W of the Districta r Mount Work Avenue e r s t Cordova Bay u Elk/Beaver Regional S Road D a The trails and walkways in Saanich are diverse and provide opportunities - I a Lake s Park n n s Killarney t ic Regional o e h of Saanich r R Lake u o Park r a b d for recreation, transportation, exploration, and education. They also Mountain a d n a Biking R o a R Area il Dominion T h celebrated its r c a Astrophysical i provide an important connection between rural and urban Saanich, and i l n Observatory a a Cordova d S a t Cordova Bay Bay o s e the cultural richness of our community.
    [Show full text]