DOCSLIB.ORG

State-Of-The-Art Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

u.s. DEPÄRTMENT OF COMMERCE Natiol Technical Information Serr.ce PBBO- 1 03641 Light Rail Transit State-of-the-Art Overview (u.s.) Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA May 77 ".." .,-"~ ~.. ~I:'" " ¡:) n -1 ': ': t. 4 1 LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT REPRODUCED BY NA TIOl-1AL TeCHNICAL INFORMTION SERVICE, u. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SPRINGFIELD, VA. 22161 ,.' Of TR-I",s,o ~..,.,'- 0+,.zc~ .C1; "f~ TECHNOLOGY SHARING IS A PROGRAM OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ..1,1".) ..,..CC S'-IT¡S 0\ ..' l- , 18111 . " Technical keport Documentation Pai- ~_._-._' 3. Recipient'i CatCllog No. 1. Report No. 2. Government Acce..ion No. OOT-TSC-OST-79-4 -pe, Yó -/¿:~:J ~ ~/ 5. Report Dote 4. Title and S"btitle May 1977 Light Rail Transit: State-of-the-Art Overview 6. Performing OrgClni zotion Code 8. Performing Orgoni zotion Report No. 7. A"thor' I) OOT-TSC-OST-79-4 9. Perf&.,ming Orgonizotion Nome and Add,e.. 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) U.S. Department of Tranportation OI001/R0907 Research & Special Program Administration 11. Cont,oct 0' G,ont No. Transportation Systems Center, Technology Sharing Offj ce Kendall Sauare. Cambridtæ. Mass. 02142 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponio,ing Agency Nome ond Add,e.. Final Report U.S~.Department of Transportation July 1933 - May 1977 Office~of the Secretary Office of the Asst. Secretary for Governental Affairs u. Sponio,ing Agency Code Washinpton D.C., 20590 15. S"pplementory Not., 16. Ab.troct This document presents an overview of light rail transit, an urban transit alternative which has the potential to help fill the need for flexibility in public transportation. Existing and proposed U. S. and Canadian light rail transit systems are described with a his torical perspective. The tedinical components and service characteristics of this mode are analyzed. The document also deals with a number of planing and implementation issues, including economics of operation, and various environmental and social concerns. 17. KeyWo,dl 18. DI.tr¡bution Stotement DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC Standard Light Rail Vehicle (SLRV) THROUGH THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL Presidents t Conference Committee Car (PCC) INFORMATION SERVICE, SPRINGFIELD, Commuter Rail Transit (CRT) VIRGINIA 22161 21. No. of Pog" 19. Sec,,'lIy Cloliif. (of this ,ito,t) 20. 5scu,lIy Ci...if. (of thl. ,.".) 8' ¿) ~~ Unclassified Unclassified ;; ;:~ r;:; Form DOT f 1700.1 (8-721 Reprotion of completed pogo authorized fOREWORD As part of its ongoing commitment to the principle of technology sharing, the U.S. Department of Transportation has initiated a series of publications based on research and development efforts sponsored by the Department. The series comprises technical reports, state-of-the-art documents, newsletters and bulletins, manuals and handbooks, bibliographies, and other special publications. All share a primary objective: to contri- bute-to a better base of knowledge and undarstcmding throughout the transportation community, and, thereby, to an improvement in the basis for decision-making within the community. This title in the series presents an overview of light rail transit, an urban transit alterna- tive which has the potential to help fil the need for flexibility in public transportation. The documen~ is designed to make more accessible the body of knowledge that now constitutes the state-of-the-art of light rail lIdnsit. A 5pecial feature is the inclusion of supplementary material to serve as a source-b~ok for further information. iW ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report is jointly sponsored by the following organizations: . OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Office of R&D Policy . TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS CENTER Technology Sharing Program Office . URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINiSTRATION A special acknowledgment is made to the light rail transit operators and planners and to the Transportation Research Board's Committee on Light Rail Transit whose review of and comment on this document is greatly appreciated. Preceding page blank iii CONTENTS FOREWORD,page; ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, page ;;; FIGURES, page v;; OVERVIEW OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT,page 1 Revived Interest in Light Rail Transit,page 1 Advantages, page 2 Historical Perspective, page 4 Existing and Proposed U.S. and Canadian Light Rail Transit Systems,page 7 v II TECHNOLOG!CAL COMPONENTS AND 5ERVICE CHAHACTERISTICS,page 11 Technological Components, page 11 Vehicles, page 11 Track, page f5 Right-of-Way,page 17 Power Distribut:on, page 20 Stations, page 22 Shops and Storage Facilities, page 23 Traffic (Signal) Control,paae 23 Service Characteristics, page 23 Frequency page 23 Speed, page 24 System Capacity, page 24 I;xpress and Local Service, page 25 !ntermodal :nterface, page 25 Safety, page 25 III PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES,page 29 Planning Criteria, page 29 Applications, page 30 Cost Requirements, page 32 Implementation Period, page 34 Environmental and Social Issues, page 34 Summary, page 35 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL APPENDIX A: Details of Existing U.S. and Canadian Light Rail Transit Systems APPEND'X B: References APPENDIX C: Suggested Periodicals and Other Sources of Current Information APPENDIX D: UMTA Policy Statement on Light Rail Transit APPEND IX E: Glossary vi FIGURES 1. Characteristics of Three R ail Transit Modes, page 3 2. u.s. and Canadian Streetcar and Light Rail Transit System Descriptions, page 6 3. Geographical Distribution of Existing and Proposed U.S. and Canadian Light Rail Transit Systems, page 8 4. The Standard Light Rail Vehicle, page 74 5. Comparison of Four Light Rail Vehicles, page 76 6. Example of Light Rail Transit Capital Costs for Various Operating and Right-of-Way Characteristics, page 33 vii , .1( "'4)""",;.',1\:\"!,j")",~'",!¡\,I'"'(~¡",,,'.:~r;;ó:'I:'::,;";l~~j¡::;;,;_\\Jii;:)~(~\¡~):fi\~;~~~.i¡¡r Chronology of Urban Transit 1819 HACKNEYSæßS DILIGENCES 1827 rHORSE DRAWN OMNIBUS 1832 I HORSE DRAWN STREET RAILWAYS I 1886 LXPER1~E.E'~!f=1863 I ~ELECTRIC 1935 STREET PCC RAILWAYS STREETCAR l SUBWAYS 1868 IELEVATED RAILWAYS 1873 ICABLE STREET RAILWAYS ~ErRl;ECJ§£§B:~li~~ 1893 ESCALATOR PATENT 1859 ~ PRO!9~1§ I MOVING PAVEMENTS 1912 ==i MOTO R BUS JITNEY 1914  1966 FIRST OILWELL 1859 ~  1896 DIESEL ENGINE =:IPEOPLE MOVERS MODERN DIESEL BUS 1941  1970 RR BLOCK SIGNALS 1867 ~  1888 AUTOMOTIVE ENGINES == rnL-A-~ 1973 ELECTRIC INDUCTION MOTORS 1892 ~ STANDARD LIGHT RAIL VEHICLE DESIGNED i -- I I I I 1 1800 1820 1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 Source: Adapted from N.D. Lea Transportation Research, Lea Transit Compendium, '/0/1 No.1, 1974 viii I OVERVIEW OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT 1 revived interest in light rail transit IN RECENT YEARS, the growing need to move people in and around urban areas economically and with minimum disruption to the quality of urban life and environment has stimu lated an interest in various transit alternatives. I n I ight of the national interest in energy conservation, the need for transit alternatives has become even more pronounced. In the realm of conventional mass transit, both new and extensions to existing rail rapid transit systems are being planned and constructed. Improvements in bus and com- muter rail services are also being planned and implemented in many urban areas. The interest in transit alternatives has also focused on techniques for making better use of existing transportation reS~iJl'ces such as the designation of exclusive lanes for buses and carpools, and the establishmi!nt of demand responsive transportation services, specialized services for the transportation disadvantaged, and subscription bus service. Evaluation of these transit alternatives, as they relate to specific applications, is necessary if citizens are to receive the best transportation service for their tax dollars. lThis state-of-the-art overview, derived largely from documented research and personal contacts, concentrates on streetcar and light rail transit systems as they exist in the U.S. and Canada. For a detailed assessment of light rail transit lir;cluding European systems). the reader is referred to Reference 55. -," ,,' _.''''''''''~'''~'''I.'",,' '"",, k"""."\,",";""\i'.~i...'""';,,,,~,,JI_~~''''I'''''i..'I It is this renewed interest and evaiuation of various transit alternatives which has inten- sified the interest in another alternative, light rail transit, a generic name for a transit mode consisting of electrically powered steel-wheeled rail vehicles ?perating predomiriantly on exclusive rights-of-way. This latter characteristic is the primary feature which dis- tinguishes light rail transit from the electric streetcar - streetcars typically share right-of- way with óther vehicular traffic on public, o;ten congested roadways- Light rail transit is an intermediate-capacity, intermediate-speed mode capable of operating at passenger volumes, and service levels, between those of hilly-separated rapid transit and those of transit opr.ating on public streets or roadways in mixed traffic. It is characterized by flexibility which prf)vides planners with a variety of options in locating and/or relocatinçç routes, and in selecting and utilizing a number of different operating procedu res. ad van tages Light rail transit has the potential of meeting transportation needs within many urban areas, Recent reports have cited a number of advantages of light rail transit, in contrast to several of the other possible alternatives (references 47. 52, and 54, DeGraw). The attributes most often cited are: . Light rail transit offers flexibility in right-of-way selection. It can be used under- ground in subways. at grade either on exclusive
Recommended publications
  • Brooklyn Transit Primary Source Packet

    Brooklyn Transit Primary Source Packet

    BROOKLYN TRANSIT PRIMARY SOURCE PACKET Student Name 1 2 INTRODUCTORY READING "New York City Transit - History and Chronology." Mta.info. Metropolitan Transit Authority. Web. 28 Dec. 2015. Adaptation In the early stages of the development of public transportation systems in New York City, all operations were run by private companies. Abraham Brower established New York City's first public transportation route in 1827, a 12-seat stagecoach that ran along Broadway in Manhattan from the Battery to Bleecker Street. By 1831, Brower had added the omnibus to his fleet. The next year, John Mason organized the New York and Harlem Railroad, a street railway that used horse-drawn cars with metal wheels and ran on a metal track. By 1855, 593 omnibuses traveled on 27 Manhattan routes and horse-drawn cars ran on street railways on Third, Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Avenues. Toward the end of the 19th century, electricity allowed for the development of electric trolley cars, which soon replaced horses. Trolley bus lines, also called trackless trolley coaches, used overhead lines for power. Staten Island was the first borough outside Manhattan to receive these electric trolley cars in the 1920s, and then finally Brooklyn joined the fun in 1930. By 1960, however, motor buses completely replaced New York City public transit trolley cars and trolley buses. The city's first regular elevated railway (el) service began on February 14, 1870. The El ran along Greenwich Street and Ninth Avenue in Manhattan. Elevated train service dominated rapid transit for the next few decades. On September 24, 1883, a Brooklyn Bridge cable-powered railway opened between Park Row in Manhattan and Sands Street in Brooklyn, carrying passengers over the bridge and back.
  • Outside Lands Outside Lands History from the Western Neighborhoods Project 2 Where in West S.F.? (Previously Issued As SF West History)

    Outside Lands Outside Lands History from the Western Neighborhoods Project 2 Where in West S.F.? (Previously Issued As SF West History)

    OutsideSan Francisco HistoryLands from Western Neighborhoods Project Volume 14, No. 1 Jan–Mar 2018 100 Years of the Twin Peaks Tunnel I NS I DE 1 Inside the Outside Lands OUTSIDE LANDS History from the Western Neighborhoods Project 2 Where in West S.F.? (Previously issued as SF West History) January-March 2018: Volume 14, Number 1 3 OpenSFHistory Highlight John Martini remembers Fleishhacker Pool EDITOR: Woody LaBounty CONTRIBUTORS: Angus Macfarlane, John Martini, and Arnold Woods 6 Roosevelt History, Part One The Story of a Richmond District school Board of Directors 2018 by Angus Macfarlane Chelsea Sellin, President Jamie O’Keefe, Vice President Anisha Gupta, Secretary 10 Westward the Course of Empire Takes its David Gallagher, Treasurer Way–100 Years of the Twin Peaks Tunnel Richard Brandi, David Chang, Nicole Meldahl, Kyrie Whitsett, Arnold Woods by Arnold Woods Staff: Woody LaBounty, Dave Lucas 15 Thank You to Our Donors Advisory Board Those who supported us in 2017 Cammy Blackstone, Al Harris, Gretchen Hilyard, Brady Lea, Felicity O’Meara, Paul Rosenberg, Nate Tico, and Lorri Ungaretti 20 Historical Happenings The WNP Event Calendar Western Neighborhoods Project 4016 Geary Boulevard, Suite A 22 A Home for History San Francisco, CA 94118 New WNP digs at 1617 Balboa Street Tel: 415/661-1000 Email: [email protected] Website: www.outsidelands.org facebook.com/outsidelands twitter.com/outsidelandz instagram.com/westernneighborhoods/ Cover: Mayor Rolph driving the first streetcar out of the west portal of the Twin Peaks tunnel, February 3, 1918. (wnp15.174) © 2018 Western Neighborhoods Project. All rights reserved. Inside the Outside Lands Woody LaBounty estern Neighborhoods Project from the neighborhoods recon- (that’s us), the nonprofit with a nected, but just as many strangers mission to preserve and share became new friends in sharing their Wlocal history, now has a public space love of history and of the west side for exhibits, presentations, and com- of San Francisco.
  • CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT

    CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT

    CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT The 2003 PMT outlined the actions needed to bring the MBTA transit system into a state of good repair (SGR). It evaluated and prioritized a number of specific enhancement and expansion projects proposed to improve the system and better serve the regional mobility needs of Commonwealth residents. In the inter- vening years, the MBTA has funded and implemented many of the 2003 PMT priorities. The transit improvements highlighted in this chapter have been accomplished in spite of the unsus- tainable condition of the Authority’s present financial structure. A 2009 report issued by the MBTA Advisory Board1 effectively summarized the Authority’s financial dilemma: For the past several years the MBTA has only balanced its budgets by restructuring debt liquidat- ing cash reserves, selling land, and other one-time actions. Today, with credit markets frozen, cash reserves depleted and the real estate market at a stand still, the MBTA has used up these options. This recession has laid bare the fact that the MBTA is mired in a structural, on-going deficit that threatens its viability. In 2000 the MBTA was re-born with the passage of the Forward Funding legislation.This legislation dedicated 20% of all sales taxes collected state-wide to the MBTA. It also transferred over $3.3 billion in Commonwealth debt from the State’s books to the T’s books. In essence, the MBTA was born broke. Throughout the 1990’s the Massachusetts sales tax grew at an average of 6.5% per year. This decade the sales tax has barely averaged 1% annual growth.
  • Journals | Penn State Libraries Open Publishing

    Journals | Penn State Libraries Open Publishing

    I I • I • I• .1.1' D . , I * ' PA « ~** • * ' > . Mechanized streetcars rose out ofa need toreplace horse- the wide variety ofdifferent electric railway systems, no single drawn streetcars. The horse itselfpresented the greatest problems: system had yet emerged as the industry standard. Early lines horses could only work a few hours each day; they were expen- tended tobe underpowered and prone to frequent equipment sive to house, feed and clean up after; ifdisease broke out within a failure. The motors on electric cars tended to make them heavier stable, the result could be a financial catastrophe for a horsecar than either horsecars or cable cars, requiring a company to operator; and, they pulled the car at only 4 to 6 miles per hour. 2 replace its existing rails withheavier ones. Due to these circum- The expenses incurred inoperating a horsecar line were stances, electric streetcars could not yet meet the demands of staggering. For example, Boston's Metropolitan Railroad required densely populated areas, and were best operated along short 3,600 horses to operate its fleet of700 cars. The average working routes serving relatively small populations. life of a car horse was onlyfour years, and new horses cost $125 to The development of two rivaltechnological systems such as $200. Itwas common practice toprovide one stable hand for cable and electric streetcars can be explained by historian every 14 to 20horses inaddition to a staff ofblacksmiths and Thomas Parke Hughes's model ofsystem development. Inthis veterinarians, and the typical car horse consumed up to 30 pounds model, Hughes describes four distinct phases ofsystem growth: ofgrain per day.
  • American Title a Sociation ~ ~

    American Title a Sociation ~ ~

    OFFICIAL PUBLICATION AMERICAN TITLE A SOCIATION ~ ~ VOUJME XXXVI JUNE, 1957 NUMBER 6 TITLE NEWS Official Publication of THE AMERICAN TITLE ASSOCIATION 3608 Guardian Building-Detroit 26, Michigan Volume XXXVI June, 1957 Number 6 Table of Contents Introduction-The Federal Highway Program ......... ... ................ .. .................... 2 J. E. Sheridan Highway Laws Relating to Controlled Access Roads ..... .. ....... ........... 6 Norman A. Erbe Title Companies and the Expanded Right of Way Problems ...... ............. .. 39 , Daniel W. Rosencrans Arthur A. Anderson Samuel J. Some William A . Thuma INTRODUCTION The Federal Highway Program J. E. SHERIDAN We are extremely grateful to Nor­ veloped its planning sufficiently to man A. Erbe, Attorney General of the show to the satisfaction of the dis­ State of Iowa, for permission to re­ trict engineer the effect of the pro­ print his splendid brief embracing posed construction upon adjace.nt the highway laws of various states property, the treatment of access con­ relating to the control in access roads. trol in the area of Federal acquisi­ Mr. Erbe originally presented this m tion, and that appropriate arrange­ narrative form before the convention ments have been made for mainte­ of the Iowa Title Association in May nance and supervision over the land of this year. As is readily ascertain­ to be acquired and held in the name able, this is the result of a compre­ of the United States pending transfer hensive study of various laws touch· of title and jurisdiction to the State ing on the incidents of highway regu­ or the proper subdivision thereof." lations. Additionally, we are privi­ It is suggested that our members leged to carry the panel discussion bring this quoted portion to the at­ of the American Right of Way Asso­ tention of officers of the Highway ciation Convention held in Chicago, Department and the office of its legal May 16 and 17, dealing with "Title division, plus the Office of the Attor­ Companies and the Expanded Right ney General within the members' ju­ of Way Problems".
  • No Action Alternative Report

    No Action Alternative Report

    No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) .......................................................................................................
  • Alberta-To-Alaska-Railway-Pre-Feasibility-Study

    Alberta-To-Alaska-Railway-Pre-Feasibility-Study

    Alberta to Alaska Railway Pre-Feasibility Study 2015 Table of Content Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... i Infrastructure and Operating Requirements................................................................ ii Environmental Considerations and Permitting Requirements .................................... ii Capital and Operating Cost Estimates ......................................................................... iii Business Case .............................................................................................................. iii Mineral Transportation Potential ................................................................................ iii First Nations/Tribes and Other Contacts ..................................................................... iv Conclusions .................................................................................................................. iv 1 | Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 This Assignment............................................................................................................ 1 This Report ................................................................................................................... 2 2 | Infrastructure and Operating Requirements ........................................................ 3 Route Alignment ..........................................................................................................
  • A Year of Movement

    A Year of Movement

    A Year of Movement San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Annual Report VISION Excellent transportation choices for San Francisco. MISSION We connect San Francisco through a safe, equitable and sustainable transportation system. Table of Contents Letter from the DOT About the SFMTA SFMTA Strategic Plan Moving Muni Forward Improving Access to Transportation Making Streets Safer with Vision Zero Building Out the Bike Network Driving Innovation Protecting the Environment Our Workplace Connects to the Transportation System Working with Communities Completed Projects FY 2017-2018 Projects on the Horizon Financial Information Key Performance Indicators Acknowledgments This annual report shares milestones and data covering the fiscal year that began July 1, 2017 and closed June 30, 2018. This period comprises the final year of the Fiscal Year 2013–2018 SFMTA Strategic Plan. A Year of Movement San Francisco is the epicenter of transportation innovation. This was true a century ago, when our city introduced Muni as the first publicly owned transit system in the nation. San Francisco continues to be the home of transportation innovations, from the great strides we’ve made to embrace environmentally friendly transportation options and being the home of the greenest public transit system in North America, to proactively designing streets that prioritize your safety and well-being no matter how you move around the city. Our annual report describes the many ways that we work to manage, operate and regulate the city’s transportation system to ensure that it is safe, reliable and equitable. Thanks to historic investments to replace and expand the entire Muni fleet with state-of-the-art light rail vehicles and new coaches, trolleys and hybrid buses, Muni now generates less than 2 percent of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Solent Connectivity May 2020

    Solent Connectivity May 2020

    Solent Connectivity May 2020 Continuous Modular Strategic Planning Page | 1 Page | 2 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 The Solent CMSP Study ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Scope and Geography....................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Fit with wider rail industry strategy ................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Governance and process .................................................................................................................. 12 3.0 Context and Strategic Questions ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1 Strategic Questions .......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Economic context ............................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 Travel patterns and changes over time ............................................................................................ 18 3.4 Dual-city region aspirations and city to city connectivity ................................................................
  • North Cambridge Railroad Safety Study 1994

    North Cambridge Railroad Safety Study 1994

    NORTH CAMBRIDGE RAILROAD SAFETY STUDY Cambridge, Massachusetts June1994 Prepared for: The City of Cambridge Community Development Department By: Wallace, Floyd, Associates Inc. Architects, Landscape Architects, Planners, Urban Designers In association with: Gordon, Bua & Read, Inc. Consulting Engineers NORTH CAMBRIDGE RAILROAD SAFETY STUDY CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS June 1994 Cambridge City Manager Deputy City Manager Robert W. Healy Richard C. Rossi Council Kenneth Reeves, Mayor Kathleen Born Francis Duehay Anthony Gallucio Jonathan Myers Sheila Russell Michael Sullivan Timothy J. Toomey Katharine Triantafillou CREDITS Michael Rosenberg, Assistant City Manager for Community Development Eileen Woodford, Director of Neighborhood Planning Stuart Dash~ Neighborhood Planner, Project Manager Dick Easler, Chief Project Planner for Transportation Planning Railroad Task Force Jackie Adams Josie Avakian Michael Brandon Donna Bronk Larry Burke Patricia Casola Peter Cignetti Dick Clarey George McCray Patrick Jordan,MBTA Tom McClain Washington Taylor Participants in Railroad Safety Task Force Meetings Kathleen Born Pat Daly Sgt. Larry Edwards, Cambridge Police Violet Jackson Sheila Russell Charles Steward, MBTA Richard Harding Duffy O'Craven John Hixson Michael Impastato George Laite Michael Sullivan Katherine Triantafillou Rep. Alice Wolf Rep. Timothy Toomey Special Thanks to Mike Inemer, CHA for the use of the Jefferson Park Meeting Room I NORTH CAMBRIDGE RAILROAD SAFETY STUDY Cambridge, Massachusetts June1994 Prepared for: The City of Cambridge .
  • Freeway Management and Operations Handbook September 2003 (See Revision History Page for Chapter Updates) 6

    Freeway Management and Operations Handbook September 2003 (See Revision History Page for Chapter Updates) 6

    FREEWAY MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS HANDBOOK FINAL REPORT September 2003 (Updated June 2006) Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-OP-04-003 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Freeway Management and Operations Handbook September 2003 (see Revision History page for chapter updates) 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Louis G. Neudorff, P.E, Jeffrey E. Randall, P.E., Robert Reiss, P..E, Robert Report Gordon, P.E. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Siemens ITS Suite 1900 11. Contract or Grant No. 2 Penn Plaza New York, NY 10121 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Office of Transportation Management Research Federal Highway Administration Room 3404 HOTM 400 Seventh Street, S.W. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington D.C., 20590 15. Supplementary Notes Jon Obenberger, FHWA Office of Transportation Management, Contracting Officers Technical Representative (COTR) 16. Abstract This document is the third such handbook for freeway management and operations. It is intended to be an introductory manual – a resource document that provides an overview of the various institutional and technical issues associated with the planning, design, implementation, operation, and management of a freeway network.
  • Newark Light Rail Schedule Pdf

    Newark Light Rail Schedule Pdf

    Newark Light Rail Schedule Pdf Unchristianly and supersafe Maurie often slops some Jesse light or attire floristically. Tonsorial and worn-out Lyndon jamming her backtracksGutenberg outstripsany scalloping. while Ernst baby-sits some varves physiologically. Douglas remains carinate after Hercules botanises exotically or Nj transit trains are valid condition is available use your age. Cash and coins are inserted into a pay box. Your ticket agent. Repeatedly check your mirrors and scan the feature ahead. Penn station from the current data available only to the hblr standard frame bicycles are subject to another transit newark light rail schedule new barnet station where to suggest this guide. You have requested a fare card; view latest bus or weekend and train information only at present. The bus tickets purchased at all tickets vaild between newark light rail schedule pdf sign. Collapsible bicycles are permitted aboard trains at all times. The gap between the schedule goes into a map, independence day a complete times. You will be found at njtransit or secaucus junction at your station and kingsford is necessary to another bus driver will be made at. Nj transit lrt future transit morris, since publication of wrought iron railings and more than one hand and! Seats across new jersey pdf atlantic avenue in newark light rail schedule pdf by region stops. Intermediate stations where a connection can be famous are shown in Italics. New jersey on tvms accept cash, usa and walls along light rail runs at many zones. Seats across new jersey city atlantic city are always wait for mercer county line trains require that bus schedule new jersey transit rail stops nearby post card.