DOCSLIB.ORG

Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR O L A STATE OF MINNESOTA Evaluation Report Summary / January 2011 Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region Major Findings: Key Recommendations: The Twin Cities region’s transit The Legislature should restructure the system has performed well on most Metropolitan Council so that it has a measures of efficiency, effectiveness, mix of appointed and elected Council and impact in comparison with 11 peer members, all serving staggered terms. regions. Given the current structure of the However, the governance of transit in Metropolitan Council, we do not the Twin Cities region is complex and recommend eliminating other fraught with distrust, and coordination organizations involved with transit, among the many transit organizations such as the Counties Transit The region has in the region has been difficult. Improvement Board or the made significant Transportation Advisory Board. The Metropolitan Council’s role as the advances in regional transit planner has been We do not recommend eliminating the transit in recent hampered by how members are suburban transit providers, although years, but the appointed; as a result of its structure, there are opportunities for some region’s transit the Council lacks adequate credibility consolidation. governance and accountability among structure is far stakeholders. The Metropolitan Council should coordinate with stakeholders to from ideal. Additionally, there is no agreed-upon prioritize potential transitways for set of priorities for transitway future development based on the needs development in the Twin Cities region, of the region. and existing Minnesota law prohibits consideration of all potential The Legislature should amend transitways in the region. Minnesota law and allow consideration of the Dan Patch corridor. Scarce resources for transit are likely to become scarcer as the state The Legislature should not commit confronts a significant budget deficit. capital funds to transitway development projects without ensuring The Metropolitan Council and that operating revenues for the first suburban transit providers have five to ten years have been identified. disagreed over the allocation of “supplemental” Motor Vehicle Sales The Legislature should explicitly give Tax revenue in the region, increasing the Metropolitan Council authority to the distrust and tension between these allocate the “supplemental” revenue groups. for transit in the region generated by the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax. Room 140 Centennial Building, 658 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155‐1603 • Tel: 651‐296‐4708 • Fax: 651‐296‐4712 E‐mail: [email protected] • Web Site: www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us • Through Minnesota Relay: 1‐800‐627‐3529 or 7‐1‐1 2 GOVERNANCE OF TRANSIT IN THE TWIN CITIES REGION Report Summary region’s transit system performed better than most of its peers on efficiency Transit in the Twin Cities region includes measures, including subsidy per several transit types, or “modes.” Our passenger and operating costs per evaluation included four modes of transit: passenger. The Twin Cities region also regular-route bus service, light rail transit, compared favorably when evaluating commuter rail, and bus rapid transit.1 service-use measures, such as passengers The transit The Twin Cities region has recently per hour and passenger miles per mile of system in the added two modes of transit, bus rapid service. Twin Cities transit and commuter rail, and is region performed developing two new light rail lines. Our evaluation focused on governance of transit in the region. We considered the well relative to 11 Nevertheless, in 2009, regular-route bus service provided close to 90 percent of governance of transit to include: peer regions the transit rides in the region. Metro (1) planning for and identifying potential around the Transit, a division within the corridors for new transit; (2) developing country. Metropolitan Council, is the primary and building transitways, including provider of transit in the region and conducting analyses to determine optimal operates bus, light rail, and commuter rail routes and transit modes; (3) providing services. Suburban providers offer bus transit; (4) generating revenue for transit, service to 12 communities in the Twin typically through imposing a levy or tax Cities metropolitan area. or collecting passenger fares; (5) allocating revenue for transit; and Several organizations have transit (6) measuring the performance of transit. responsibilities in the region, including the Metropolitan Council, the Governance of transit in the Twin Transportation Advisory Board (TAB), Cities region is complex and made the Counties Transit Improvement Board more difficult by the uneasy (CTIB), county regional railroad relationships among the various authorities, and suburban transit organizations involved with transit in providers. Many of these organizations the region. were created to address perceived local Each transit organization serves a distinct transit needs. The structure of transit but somewhat overlapping role for transit governance in the region has changed in the region. Each organization can several times since the Council was operate independently to some extent but created in 1967 and has gone through However, the also must coordinate with others in the periods of fragmentation and region’s region. The complexity of the system consolidation. governance makes it difficult to know which structure has In 2009, providers spent almost $319 organization is accountable for which created challenges million on transit operations in the Twin transit responsibility. Cities region. Since 2004, the region has and conflicts. There is significant distrust between the spent more than $1.7 billion on transit Met Council and the other transit capital expenditures. organizations in the Twin Cities region. When compared with 11 peer regions This distrust makes coordination among around the country, transit in the Twin the organizations difficult. The strongest Cities region performed favorably.2 For example is the relationship between the example, in 2008, the Twin Cities Met Council and the suburban transit providers. In interviews we had with suburban transit providers and Council 1 Our evaluation does not address dial-a-ride service, such as Transit Link and Metro staff, and during joint meetings with Mobility. representatives from the two 2 The 11 peer regions are: Baltimore, Cleveland, organizations, the conflict and distrust Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, between these two groups were evident. Portland, St. Louis, San Diego, Seattle, and Tampa. SUMMARY 3 The relationship between the Met Council members are appointed, local elected and the Counties Transit Improvement officials often question the legitimacy of Board is also strained. For example, the Council decisions. Coordination two organizations disagree over the among the many definition of “transitway,” which has led Transit resources have been transit to tension regarding CTIB’s funding unpredictable. priorities. organizations Transit providers spent almost $319 involved in Coordination among transit million in 2009 on transit operations in governance is organizations in the region is time the region. Motor Vehicle Sales Tax difficult. consuming and inefficient. (MVST) revenues are the largest source of operating funds for transit in the Twin The suburban transit providers and Metro Cities region. However, these revenues Transit coordinate their services have not grown as projected. The state’s effectively. However, coordination May 2007 projections anticipated that between the Met Council and the more than $169 million of MVST suburban providers has required revenues would be allocated to transit in significant time and energy from both the Twin Cities region in fiscal year Council and suburban provider staff, even 2010; instead, $140.7 million was though the suburban providers represent allocated to transit in the region. only about 6 percent of all rides in the region. The suburban providers and the Minnesota statutes do not identify how Council have had innumerable staff and “supplemental” Motor Vehicle Sales committee meetings, required approvals, Tax revenue should be allocated for e-mails, and shared letters. Staff on both transit in the region. sides of this relationship think the In 2006, Minnesota voters passed a coordination efforts are inefficient and constitutional amendment to allocate time consuming, and the lack of trust additional Motor Vehicle Sales Tax between these two groups makes it revenue to transit. However, the difficult to reach agreement on many Legislature has not clarified how this transit-related issues. funding, known as “supplemental” Coordination between the Council and MVST revenue, should be allocated CTIB is also time consuming. Having within the region. Staff from the both bodies make decisions about transit suburban transit providers told us that investments in the region leads to overlap they had expected to receive a formula- A central and requires additional coordination. based portion of the new funds. Instead, the Met Council created a procedure to governance issue The Metropolitan Council’s structure distribute the supplemental MVST funds has been the has created a lack of credibility among based on regional priorities. Metropolitan many stakeholders and transit Council’s lack of organizations in the region. There is no agreed-upon set of priorities for transit in the region, and credibility with The Met Council’s
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Passenger Rail System
    Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Passenger Rail System draft technical memorandum 3 prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. TKDA, Inc. July 17, 2009 www.camsys.com technical memorandum 3 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Passenger Rail System prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 July 17, 2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Passenger Rail System Technical Memorandum Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 Objective ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 2-1 3.0 Overview of Findings .................................................................................................. 3-1 4.0 Operating and Capacity Conditions and Existing Ridership Forecasts for Potential Passenger Rail Corridors ........................................................................... 4-1 4.1 CP: Rochester-Winona......................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 CP: St. Paul-Red
    [Show full text]
  • 2030 Comprehensive Plan
    City of Savage Comprehensive Plan Savage, Minnesota Adopted by the Savage City Council September 8, 2009 Table of Contents 1. Introduction.................................................................................... 1-1 2. Land Use ........................................................................................ 2-1 3. Housing .......................................................................................... 3-1 4. Natural Resources Management Plan......................................... 4-1 5. Transportation ............................................................................... 5-1 6. Parks............................................................................................... 6-1 7. Economic Development Plan....................................................... 7-1 8. Water Supply Plan......................................................................... 8-1 9. Sanitary Sewer Plan ...................................................................... 9-1 ©2009 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. table of contents 1. Introduction The City of Savage is located approximately 16 miles south of downtown Minneapolis, in the northeastern portion of Scott County (Figure 1-1). The outer boundaries of the City encompass an area about three miles from east to west and five miles north to south (approximately 17 square miles). The northern border of the City is the Minnesota River, across which lies the City of Bloomington in Hennepin County. To
    [Show full text]
  • 261 to Steam Again This Year #261 Will Steam to Du- Luth on June 4 2016 and Return to Mpls on June 5 2016
    Volume 47 #4 Northstar Railway Historical Society April 2016 Publishers of the Minnesota Rail Calendar #261 to Steam Again This Year #261 will Steam to Du- luth on June 4 2016 and return to Mpls on June 5 2016. Info at 261.com Photos: 2007: #261 on Kettle River Br in Sandstone and at Brook Park MN By R Tubbesing Table of Contents Meeting Notice Meeting Notice Page 1 Next business meeting will be held on Officer Contact Directory Page 1, 2 Saturday April 16th 2016 6:30 pm, at Roseville Lutheran Church at 1215 Roselawn Avenue, midway between Lexington and Editors Column Page 2 Hamline Avenues in Roseville. See map on page 2. March 2016 Meeting MInutes Page 2,3 John Goodman Interview Page 3 Program after the meeting – St Paul Union Depot Days Update Page 3 Historic Railroad Slides by Greg Smith from his vast slide collection. Suit Against CP Page 4 Greg has worked on various railroads during his career. Many slides have been acquired and shot by Greg over the years. Greg has present- LSRM Dome cars Page 4, ed programs in the past and has been very well received by our mem- BNSF Restores Dome Car Page 5 bers. MINN and WISC explore 2nd Amtrak Train Page 6 Northshore Resumes Taconite Operation Page 6,7 There will be a pre-meeting get-together April 16, 2016 at the Keys RR Bridge to Return to Operation Page 7 Cafe and Bakery at the northeast corner of Lexington and Larpenteur starting about 4:45 pm. PLEASE CALL Bob Clarkson at 651-636- C&NW 1946 Passgenger Specs Page 8, 9 2323 and leave a message with your name and the number of persons Gary Rumler and Barney Olson Vintage Photos Page 10 coming with you.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B.Doc
    B BACKGROUND MATERIAL SECTION 2 – PLAN ADMINISTRATION GUIDELINES 2.1 Governance It is assumed for the purposes of this System Plan that the ownership of commuter rail assets throughout the State of Minnesota would be in the public interest. In other words, the citizen taxpayers of the state would own the system – specifically those commuter rail assets that are separable from the freight rail facilities, systems, equipment and/or rights-of-way that are owned by the relevant freight railroads. There are several considerations that validate the assumption of public ownership: • The public sector is the logical administrator and overseer of public transportation services provided over rights-of-way owned and operated by multiple freight rail carriers. • Public policy dictates that commuter rail service be provided within the framework of a regional and potentially statewide, publicly funded multi- modal transportation system. • The public sector is the appropriate and responsible choice as manager of the expenditure of public funding required to plan, design, construct, operate and maintain such a system. • The provision of commuter rail service is not viable without substantial public sector financing, which would not likely be available under the auspices of private ownership. The commuter rail service sponsor is the public entity or combination of entities that serves as the public’s principal agent for or overseer of such service. As such, a sponsor serves at a minimum as the lead administrator or contracting entity for all services to be provided. All commuter rail services operated throughout the nation are owned by the public sector and sponsored by one or more public agencies through a variety of intergovernmental agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation, Social and Economic Impacts of Light and Commuter Rail in Metropolitan Areas URL
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-10/0-5652-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date TRANSPORTATION, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF November 2008 LIGHT AND COMMUTER RAIL Published: September 2009 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jeffrey C. Arndt, Curtis Morgan, John H. Overman, Terry L. Clower, Report 0-5652-1 Ph.D., Bernard L. Weinstein, Ph.D., and Michael Seman, M.S 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-5652 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2007-August 2008 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Transportation, Social and Economic Impacts of Light and Commuter Rail in Metropolitan Areas URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5652-1.pdf 16. Abstract While transportation impacts are often masked by heavy growth in corridor traffic and latent travel demand, modeling enables measuring the real transportation impacts of rail projects. Rail transit is both safe and environmentally friendly. Rail systems expand mobility and reduce household investment in transportation. However, as regions implement rail systems, they must take care to consider the full range of rider impacts so that environmental justice issues do not emerge.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. Transportation
    5. Transportation Chapter Highlights Edina’s Transportation Planning This chapter of the Edina Comprehensive Plan Mission: discusses the transportation network; its existing and planned future design, function, The mission for transportation planning in Edina is to and operational characteristics. Current and provide access and facilitate the movement of people and future conditions are considered against three goods efficiently, safely, cost effectively, and comfortably to aspects of movement: 1) to and from, 2) any desired destination while, at the same time, seeking to within, and 3) through the City. As presented improve community livability and the environment and in this chapter, movement is broadly discussed minimize associated negative impacts. to take into account: Transportation planning is not an end in and of itself. • The municipal transportation system Instead, transportation planning is performed to comprising local streets, pedestrian ways, proactively identify the most suitable travel modes and bicycle facilities, and City-operated pathways to help achieve a desirable and livable community transit services; and accommodate safe and convenient travel to, within, and through the community’s nodes, parks, and City • The regional transportation system of State of Minnesota and Hennepin County facilities. Toward this end, this chapter considers the roles highways of a range of transportation infrastructure (roadways, transitways, walkways, bikeways, railways and flyways), to • Transit services that are provided by the support a variety of vehicles, each operating successfully Metropolitan Council/Metro Transit, and in a manner that minimizes conflicts with each other Southwest Metro Transit; and the City of and surrounding land uses. Edina through a contractual arrangement with DARTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Fhwa/Tx-10/0-5652-1 Transportation
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-10/0-5652-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date TRANSPORTATION, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF November 2008 LIGHT AND COMMUTER RAIL Published: September 2009 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jeffrey C. Arndt, Curtis Morgan, John H. Overman, Terry L. Clower, Report 0-5652-1 Ph.D., Bernard L. Weinstein, Ph.D., and Michael Seman, M.S 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-5652 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2007-August 2008 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Transportation, Social and Economic Impacts of Light and Commuter Rail in Metropolitan Areas URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5652-1.pdf 16. Abstract While transportation impacts are often masked by heavy growth in corridor traffic and latent travel demand, modeling enables measuring the real transportation impacts of rail projects. Rail transit is both safe and environmentally friendly. Rail systems expand mobility and reduce household investment in transportation. However, as regions implement rail systems, they must take care to consider the full range of rider impacts so that environmental justice issues do not emerge.
    [Show full text]
  • Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region
    OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR O L A STATE OF MINNESOTA Evaluation Report Summary / January 2011 Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region Major Findings: Key Recommendations: The Twin Cities region’s transit The Legislature should restructure the system has performed well on most Metropolitan Council so that it has a measures of efficiency, effectiveness, mix of appointed and elected Council and impact in comparison with 11 peer members, all serving staggered terms. regions. Given the current structure of the However, the governance of transit in Metropolitan Council, we do not the Twin Cities region is complex and recommend eliminating other fraught with distrust, and coordination organizations involved with transit, among the many transit organizations such as the Counties Transit The region has in the region has been difficult. Improvement Board or the made significant Transportation Advisory Board. The Metropolitan Council’s role as the advances in regional transit planner has been We do not recommend eliminating the transit in recent hampered by how members are suburban transit providers, although years, but the appointed; as a result of its structure, there are opportunities for some region’s transit the Council lacks adequate credibility consolidation. governance and accountability among structure is far stakeholders. The Metropolitan Council should coordinate with stakeholders to from ideal. Additionally, there is no agreed-upon prioritize potential transitways for set of priorities for transitway future development based on the needs development in the Twin Cities region, of the region. and existing Minnesota law prohibits consideration of all potential The Legislature should amend transitways in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Plan
    2040 TRANSPORTATION PLAN November 30, 2018 DRAFT DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS VISION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ........................................................................................ 1 GOALS AND POLICIES ............................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Regional Transportation Goals ........................................................................................................................... 1 City of Prior Lake Goals and Policies ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Major Trends and Influencing Factors ..................................................................................................................................... 4 ROADWAY SYSTEM .................................................................................................................................... 5 Jurisdictional Classification ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 Functional Classification .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Programmed and Planned Improvements ............................................................................................................................. 12 2040 Travel Demand
    [Show full text]
  • Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region
    Office of the Legislative Auditor State of Minnesota Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region October 2011 Twin Cities Region Transit Overview • Regular-route bus – Express – Local • Light rail transit • Commuter rail • Bus rapid transit • 2009 operating costs: $319 million • 2009 riders: 81 million Key Legislative Recommendations • The Legislature should restructure the Metropolitan Council. • The Legislature should extend the transit taxing district. • The Legislature should allow consideration of the Dan Patch corridor. • The Legislature should clarify the goals and priorities of transit in the Twin Cities region. The Region’s Transit System Performs RltilRelatively W Wllell • Comppp,g,ared to 11 peers, including Denver, Phoenix, Portland, and Seattle • Performed well on “efficiency” measures – Operating cost per passenger – Fare-recovery percentage – Subsidy per passenger – Subsidy per passenger mile Efficiency Measures Measure Twin TC Best Worst Cities Region Region Rank Operating cost $2.59 $5.36 $3.24 4 per passenger (San Diego) (Dallas-Fort Worth) Fare-recovery 35% 13% 31% 2 ppgercentage ((g)San Diego) (Dallas-Fort Worth) Subsidy per $1.68 $3.59 $2.24 2 passenger (San Diego) (Pittsburgh) Subsidy per $0.35 $0.82 $0.45 2 passenger mile (San Diego) (Dallas-Fort Worth) The Region’s Transit System Performs Relatively Well • Compared to 11 peers, including Denver, Phoeni x, P ortl and , an d Sea ttle • Performed well on “efficiency” measures – Operating cost per passenger – Fare-recovery percentage – Subsidy per passenger – Subsidy
    [Show full text]
  • Funding Strategies and Project Costs for State-Supported Intercity Passenger Rail: Selected Case Studies and Cost Data
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-05/0-4723-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date FUNDING STRATEGIES AND PROJECT COSTS FOR STATE- December 2004 SUPPORTED INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL: SELECTED CASE Resubmitted: June 2005 STUDIES AND COST DATA 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. C.A. Morgan, J.E. Warner, C.E. Roco, and S.S. Roop Report 0-4723-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-4723 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2003 - October 2004 P. O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: State-Supported Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors - Project Costs and Funding Strategies Employed by Other States 16. Abstract This report documents an investigation into project costs and funding strategies that U.S. states and coalitions of states use to fund intercity passenger rail projects. Four states (California, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia) and one multi-state corridor (the Pacific Northwest Corridor in Washington and Oregon) with documented histories of funding intercity passenger rail projects were selected for in-depth review. Factors that were considered in the case studies included: state-level funding sources, project costs, and estimated costs for future projects.
    [Show full text]
  • From Light Rail to Streetcar: Tents Offers Links Directly to Each Ar- Portland, Oregon
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD / NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL VOL. 16, NO. 2 FALL 2001 WASHINGTON, D.C. CONTENTS Minnesota’s Hiawatha Line: From Streetcar to Light Rail . 2 on the Internet! And Commuter Rail, Too! . 7 LRT News is published exclusively LRT + RR = Tram-Train . 10 on the Internet. The table of con- From Light Rail to Streetcar: tents offers links directly to each ar- Portland, Oregon . 12 ticle, or you can scroll down to read the entire newsletter. To receive Related Transit Links . 14 LRT News, please bookmark the TRB online publications page http://www4.trb.org/trb/ onlinepubs.nsf. Don’t Forget TRB 81st Annual Meeting, January 13–17, 2002 The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National Research www4.trb.org/trb/annual.nsf Council, which serves as an indepen- dent advisor to the federal government on scientific and technical questions Now in Electronic Format of national importance. The National Research Council, jointly administered This Is LRT by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, www.trb.org/publications/circulars/ec033.pdf and the Institute of Medicine, brings the resources of the entire scientific LRT News is published intermittently by the Transportation and technical community to bear on national problems through its volun- Research Board to disseminate information on new developments teer advisory committees. in light rail transit planning, technology, and operations. The newsletter also reports on new studies, completed research, and cur- rent literature. The publication of LRT News is made possible through funding under the Technical Assistance Program of the Federal Transit Administration.
    [Show full text]