DOCSLIB.ORG

Smartmoves Connections Final Project Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report June 2021 | Pittsburgh, PA This document is available in alternate formats upon request. SPC will provide translation and interpretation services upon request at no charge. Please call SPC at (412) 391-5590 for more information. SmartMoves Connections IV Final Project Report The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) hereby gives public notice that it is the policy of the Commission to assure full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. Title VI and other related statutes require that no person in the United States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, sex, national origin, age, or disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which SPC receives federal financial assistance. Any person who believes they have been aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice by SPC under Title VI has a right to file a formal complaint with the Commission. Any such complaint must be in writing and filed with SPC’s Title VI Coordinator within one hundred eighty (180) days following the date of the alleged discriminatory occurrence. For more information, or to obtain a Title VI Discrimination Complaint Form, please see our website at: www.spcregion.org or call 412-391-5590. SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report V Project Vision Statement It is the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission’s vision for the SmartMoves Connections Project: • To identify through an empirical methodology the best locations for future investments in Multimodal Hubs connected by Multimodal Corridors; • To identify the best coordination strategies for operating these assets; • To ensure that the next generation of planning for multimodal investment is based on the needs of transit riders and communities. SmartMoves Connections VI Final Project Report Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission 2021 Officers Chairman: Rich Fitzgerald Vice Chairman: Leslie A. Osche Secretary-Treasurer: Pat Fabian Executive Director: Vincent Valdes Allegheny County Armstrong County Beaver County Butler County Rich Fitzgerald Darin Alviano Tony Amadio Kevin Boozel Lynn Heckman Pat Fabian Daniel Camp Kim Geyer Clifford Levine Donald K. Myers Kelly Gray Mark Gordon Robert J. Macey Jason L. Renshaw Charles Jones Richard Hadley Kelli Wingard Jack Manning Leslie A. Osche Fayette County Greene County Indiana County Lawrence County Scott Dunn Mike Belding Robin Gorman Morgan Boyd Joe Grata Rich Cleveland Sherene Hess Loretta Spielvogel Fred Junko Jeff Marshall Mark Hilliard James Gagliano Dave Lohr Betsy McClure Mike Keith Amy McKinney Vincent A. Vicites Blair Zimmerman Byron G. Stauffer, Jr. Daniel J. Vogler Washington County Westmoreland County City of Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Larry Maggi Tom Ceraso Scott Bricker (2 Votes) Scott Putnam Gina Cerilli Rev. Ricky Burgess Nick Sherman Douglas Chew William Peduto Brian Allen Diana Irey Vaughan Sean Kertes Mavis Rainey William Kovach Christopher Wheat Robert Regola Aurora Sharrard Kevin McCullough Cheryl Moon-Sirianni Larry Shifflet Governor’s Office Pennsylvania Department Port Authority of Transit Operators of Community & Economic Allegheny County Committee Jessica Walls-Lavelle Development (1 Vote) Sheila Gombita Johnna Pro Katharine Kelleman Ed Typanski Federal Highway Federal Transit U.S. Environmental Federal Aviation Administration* Administration* Protection Agency* Administration* Alicia Nolan Theresa Garcia-Crews Laura Mohollen U. S. Economic Development Administration* *Nonvoting Members The preparation of this publication was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration; the U.S. Department of Commerce; the Appalachian Regional Commission; the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and, the counties of Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington, Westmoreland, and the City of Pittsburgh. The views and opinions of the authors or agency expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of these agencies. SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report VII Project Team SPC Staff David Totten - Project Manager Kristin Baum Lean Chaney Ronda Craig Anthony Hickton Stephanie Kambic Tom Klevan Josh Spano Kathy Stefani Andy Waple Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Two Chatham Center, Suite 500 Steering Committee 112 Washington Place Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Andy Batson, PennDOT Bureau of Public Transportation www.spcregion.org Dara Braitman, Pittsburgh Dept. of Mobility & Infrastructure Daniel Carpenter, Westmoreland County Planning Sheila Gombita, Freedom Transit Ernie Hogan, Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment Group Josh Krug, Indiana County Planning & Development Joel MacKay, Butler County Planning Ann Ogoreuc, Allegheny County Economic Development Chris Sandvig, Mobilify Kathryn Schlesinger, Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership Lew Villotti, Beaver County Corporation Laura Chu Wiens, Pittsburghers for Public Transit David Wohlwill, Port Authority of Allgehny County Transit Operators Airport Corridor Transportation Association Beaver County Transit Authority Butler Transit Authority Fayette Area Coordinated Transportation Greene County Human Services Indiana County Transit Authority Heritage Community Transportation Mid Mon Valley Transit Authority Port Authority of Allegheny County Town and Country Transit Washington County Transportation Authority Westmoreland County Transit Authority SmartMoves Connections VIII Final Project Report Project Consultants Delta Development Group 2000 Technology Parkway Lynn Colosi Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Lynda Conway www.deltaone.com Christine Mondor evolve environment::architecture Elijah Hughes 6020 Broad Street Nico Azel Pittsburgh, PA 15206 Ashley Cox www.evolveea.com David Ge CivicMapper Emily Mercurio, PhD, PG 6101 Penn Avenue Christian Gass Pittsburgh, PA 15206 Tal Cohen www.civicmapper.com TranSystems 400 W. Nationwide Blvd, Suite 225 Aaron Grilliot, PE, PTOE Columbus, OH 42315 Nick Mandler, PE www.transystems.com SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report IX Contents Chapter 1: Executive Summary 1 A REGIONAL VISION FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION MULTI-AGENCY AND INTER-DISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION A DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH A FRAMEWORK FOR THE REGION Chapter 2: Introduction to the Project 7 PROJECT BACKGROUND PROJECT APPROACH PLANNING COORDINATION HOW TO USE THIS PLAN Chapter 3: Learning from Others 19 SYNOPSES OF REGIONAL PLANS AND DATA STUDY OF BEST PRACTICES PROJECT PLANNING INPUT SmartMoves Connections X Final Project Report Chapter 4: Multimodal Hubs 91 OVERVIEW AND EXAMPLES WHERE SHOULD HUBS BE LOCATED? WHAT FACILITIES SHOULD HUBS HAVE? MULTIMODAL HUB OPPORTUNITIES Chapter 5: Multimodal Corridors 131 OVERVIEW WHICH CORRIDORS SHOULD BE IMPROVED? WHAT IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE? MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR OPPORTUNITIES Chapter 6: Visualization and Validation 159 TECHNICAL VALIDATION CORRIDOR SIMULATION Appendices 165 A.1 ONLINE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT TOOL 165 A.2 SURVEY RESULTS 195 SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report XI SmartMoves Connections XII Final Project Report 1 Executive Summary A REGIONAL VISION FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION MULTI-AGENCY AND INTER-DISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION A DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH A FRAMEWORK FOR THE REGION SmartMoves Connections Final Project Report 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SmartMoves Connections is a 1 regional vision for multimodal transportation For more than 100 years, To understand these new rules and prepare the region’s transportation system for demographic, economic, southwestern Pennsylvania’s environmental, and technological transformations, The transportation network was based Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) undertook on a pattern of hubs and spokes. SmartMoves for a Changing Region. The overarching objective of this long range plan is to create “a world- The hubs were typically county class, safe and well maintained, integrated transportation seats or major activity center system that provides mobility for all, enables resilient communities, and supports a globally competitive locations, and the spokes were economy.” From the long range plan transpired a specific interurban rail and trolley lines effort, SmartMoves Connections, to produce a regional that connected the hubs. But concept for public transportation, and regional connections and coordination among transit agencies. over the years, population and real estate trends throughout the region changed and technologies advanced causing the transportation network to follow Strategy highlight from the SmartMoves for a Changing Region Long Range Plan1 different rules. What was determined from SmartMoves Connections is that it is important to recognize the old hub and spoke system because it still forms the backbone of the regional transportation network, but more so to identify new and changing travel patterns that can inspire projects that modernize regional mobility. The backbone of the network is based on Downtown Pittsburgh as the main economic activity center but the current and changing network recognizes other critical clusters throughout the region that exhibit increased traffic and economic activity and therefore, increased demand. SmartMoves
Recommended publications
  • BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States By: Andrew Degerstrom September 2018 Contents Introduction .............................................................................................1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................1 Economic Development and Transit-Oriented Development ...................2 Definition of Bus Rapid Transit .................................................................2 Literature Review ..................................................................................3 BRT Economic Development Outcomes ...................................................3 Factors that Affect the Success of BRTOD Implementation .....................5 Case Studies ...........................................................................................7 Cleveland HealthLine ................................................................................7 Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway East Liberty Station ..... 11 Pittsburgh Uptown-Oakland BRT and the EcoInnovation District .......... 16 BRTOD at home, the rapid bus A Line and the METRO Gold Line .........20 Conclusion .............................................................................................23 References .............................................................................................24 Artist rendering of Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood and the Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway Introduction Purpose of this Report If Light Rail Transit (LRT)
  • Innovation. Technology. Performance. for the URBAN RAIL COMMUNITY

    Innovation. Technology. Performance. for the URBAN RAIL COMMUNITY

    Smart cities Tram-trains Ticketing Power Traction CBTC Train control Technology Mobility Telecommunications Innovation Innovation. Driverless Infrastructure Passenger Information Asset management FOR THE URBAN RAIL COMMUNITY Technology. Performance. www.terrapinn.com/railliveamericas Organized by Our Story Hall of Fame Revamped for the new year, RAIL Live! Americas 2019 is moving to Baltimore’s Inner Harbor as we build on the success of World MetroRail Congress Americas 2018, which continued our strong tradition of bringing together top leaders from the Americas’ most influential and innovative transit agencies. Andy Byford Jim Kenney 2018 leaders included Kevin Desmond, CEO of TransLink, Edward Reiskin, President Mayor Director of Transportation for the SFMTA, Jim Kenney, Mayor, City of Philadelphia New York City Transit City of Philadelphia Tom Gerend, Executive Director of KC Streetcar, Robert Puentes, President & CEO of the Eno Center for Transportation, Martin Buck, International Lead for Crossrail in London, and Lorenzo Aguilar Camelo, the General Director of Metrorrey in Monterrey, Mexico. KEY INDUSTRY DISCUSSIONS FOR 2019 WILL BE DIVIDED INTO FOUR Jascha Franklin-Hodge Bill Zebrowski Chief Information Officer BRAND NEW TRACKS: Chief Information Officer Department of Innovation & SEPTA • The Future of Mobility: Discussions around Mobility as a Service, Fare Collection, Technology, City of Boston Intermodality, Ridership, Passenger Information Systems, and First and Last Mile transport. • New Project Development: Examining Funding and Financing, Public-Private Partnerships, Procurement, Designing and Building New Metros, Light Rails, Commuter, and High-Speed Rail Lines. Meera Joshi Adam Giambrone NYC Taxi and Limousine Director, Brooklyn-Queens • Train Control: Covering ATC, CBTC, PTC, as well as the Full Spectrum of Commission Connector [Streetcars and LRT] Modernizing Signaling and Train Control Systems to Increase Safety and Capacity.
  • Potomac Yard

    Potomac Yard

    Alexandria Transit Vision Plan – POTOMAC YARD The Potomac Yard community is generally located in northeastern Alexandria along Richmond Highway, between Slaters Lane and Four Mile Run. It is currently served by one Metrobus route (Metroway), and two DASH routes (AT-9 and AT-10). For Potomac Yard, the key changes for the 2030 ATV Network include: • AT-9 replaced by the “N8”. The existing AT-9 will be replaced by the new “N8” route with all-day, frequent service from the new Potomac Yard Metro to Arlandria, Shirlington, Mark Center, the West End and Van Dorn Metro. Route will operate every 15 minutes or better, seven days per week, providing significant improvements in transit access for Potomac Yard residents and businesses. • New “N6 route with direct connection to Old Town Alexandria. The new “N6” route will run between Potomac Yard and Old Town Alexandria (King/Washington) via Slater Lane and Old Town North. The direct connection between the new Potomac Yard Metrorail and the heart of Old Town Alexandria will run every 30 minutes, seven days per week. • DASH AT-10 stays the same. The AT-10 route will maintain its current alignment and service levels between Potomac Yard, Del Ray and King Street Metro. • Metroway remain the same. The 2030 network maintains the existing Metroway route at existing levels of service. What can I access via transit in 30 minutes from Potomac Yard at 12pm in 2030? Existing Network 2030 Network % Change Residents 64,272 87,571 +36% Jobs 63,878 88,351 +38% (See reverse side for www.dashbus.com/transitvision more information.) For Potomac Yard, the key changes for the 2022 ATV Network include: • AT-9 replaced by the “N8”.
  • BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session

    BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session

    Housing Financing Tools and Equitable, Location-Efficient Development in California BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session Prepared for: Governor's Office of Planning and Research December 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Organization ................................................................................................................ 5 II. BACKGROUND ON THE SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL FINANCE AND TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS ACT ................................................................................................................ 7 Definition of Bus Transit ......................................................................................................... 7 Extent of Use ........................................................................................................................... 7 III. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 9 Literature Overview ................................................................................................................
  • Process for Congestion Relief Link and Project Priority Ranking for CIS FY 1322

    Process for Congestion Relief Link and Project Priority Ranking for CIS FY 1322

    Process for Congestion Relief Link and Project Priority Ranking for CIS FY 1322 Congestion Management System (CMS) congestion link priority rankings were developed for all the links in the CMS. These link rankings serve two purposes. First is to rank the links so that priority can be established by location so that the highest priority congested locations can be identified. Second, for highway projects that have already been identified, they can be prioritized for congestion. The link rankings were developed using scores from “0” to “10” for each measure and the weighted by the percent for each measure to obtain a 100% score. A score of “10” was given for the highest priority values for each given measure used. The Congestion Relief priority rankings are primarily based on congestion performance measures, with consideration also given to related roadway usage characteristics. Congestion performance measures include volume to capacity (V/C) ratios and delays. Roadway usage characteristics include AADT traffic volumes, function class and strategic network. The congestion performance measures comprise 70% of the ranking while the roadway usage characteristics comprise the remaining 30%. As V/C ratios have been the most common performance measure used for congestion priority rankings, the V/C ratio scores were given 40% of the overall weight for the overall score, split evenly between AM and PM V/C ratios. The highest one‐way AM V/C was given 20% of the overall weight, while the highest one‐way PM V/C was also given 20% of the overall weight. Delays were given 30% of the overall weight, split by two types of delays.
  • Emission Station List by County for the Web

    Emission Station List by County for the Web

    Emission Station List By County for the Web Run Date: June 20, 2018 Run Time: 7:24:12 AM Type of test performed OIS County Station Status Station Name Station Address Phone Number Number OBD Tailpipe Visual Dynamometer ADAMS Active 194 Imports Inc B067 680 HANOVER PIKE , LITTLESTOWN PA 17340 717-359-7752 X ADAMS Active Bankerts Auto Service L311 3001 HANOVER PIKE , HANOVER PA 17331 717-632-8464 X ADAMS Active Bankert'S Garage DB27 168 FERN DRIVE , NEW OXFORD PA 17350 717-624-0420 X ADAMS Active Bell'S Auto Repair Llc DN71 2825 CARLISLE PIKE , NEW OXFORD PA 17350 717-624-4752 X ADAMS Active Biglerville Tire & Auto 5260 301 E YORK ST , BIGLERVILLE PA 17307 -- ADAMS Active Chohany Auto Repr. Sales & Svc EJ73 2782 CARLISLE PIKE , NEW OXFORD PA 17350 717-479-5589 X 1489 CRANBERRY RD. , YORK SPRINGS PA ADAMS Active Clines Auto Worx Llc EQ02 717-321-4929 X 17372 611 MAIN STREET REAR , MCSHERRYSTOWN ADAMS Active Dodd'S Garage K149 717-637-1072 X PA 17344 ADAMS Active Gene Latta Ford Inc A809 1565 CARLISLE PIKE , HANOVER PA 17331 717-633-1999 X ADAMS Active Greg'S Auto And Truck Repair X994 1935 E BERLIN ROAD , NEW OXFORD PA 17350 717-624-2926 X ADAMS Active Hanover Nissan EG08 75 W EISENHOWER DR , HANOVER PA 17331 717-637-1121 X ADAMS Active Hanover Toyota X536 RT 94-1830 CARLISLE PK , HANOVER PA 17331 717-633-1818 X ADAMS Active Lawrence Motors Inc N318 1726 CARLISLE PIKE , HANOVER PA 17331 717-637-6664 X 630 HOOVER SCHOOL RD , EAST BERLIN PA ADAMS Active Leas Garage 6722 717-259-0311 X 17316-9571 586 W KING STREET , ABBOTTSTOWN PA ADAMS Active
  • Llght Rall Translt Statlon Deslgn Guldellnes

    Llght Rall Translt Statlon Deslgn Guldellnes

    PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT V.4.0 7/20/18 STATION DESIGN GUIDELINES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC) provides public transportation throughout Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. The Authority’s 2,600 employees operate, maintain, and support bus, light rail, incline, and paratransit services for approximately 200,000 daily riders. Port Authority is currently focused on enacting several improvements to make service more efficient and easier to use. Numerous projects are either underway or in the planning stages, including implementation of smart card technology, real-time vehicle tracking, and on-street bus rapid transit. Port Authority is governed by an 11-member Board of Directors – unpaid volunteers who are appointed by the Allegheny County Executive, leaders from both parties in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate, and the Governor of Pennsylvania. The Board holds monthly public meetings. Port Authority’s budget is funded by fare and advertising revenue, along with money from county, state, and federal sources. The Authority’s finances and operations are audited on a regular basis, both internally and by external agencies. Port Authority began serving the community in March 1964. The Authority was created in 1959 when the Pennsylvania Legislature authorized the consolidation of 33 private transit carriers, many of which were failing financially. The consolidation included the Pittsburgh Railways Company, along with 32 independent bus and inclined plane companies. By combining fare structures and centralizing operations, Port Authority established the first unified transit system in Allegheny County. Participants Port Authority of Allegheny County would like to thank agency partners for supporting the Light Rail Transportation Station Guidelines, as well as those who participated by dedicating their time and expertise.
  • Double Line Image Rotation Amir Hossein Ashtari, Member, IEEE,Mdjannordin,Member, IEEE, and Seyed Mostafa Mousavi Kahaki, Member, IEEE

    Double Line Image Rotation Amir Hossein Ashtari, Member, IEEE,Mdjannordin,Member, IEEE, and Seyed Mostafa Mousavi Kahaki, Member, IEEE

    3370 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, VOL. 24, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2015 Double Line Image Rotation Amir Hossein Ashtari, Member, IEEE,MdJanNordin,Member, IEEE, and Seyed Mostafa Mousavi Kahaki, Member, IEEE Abstract— This paper proposes a fast algorithm for rotating rotation transformation has been expressed in (2). The direct images while preserving their quality. The new approach rotates determination of the rotated points is a one-pass method. images based on vertical or horizontal lines in the original image and their rotated equation in the target image. The proposed xr cos α − sin α xt method is a one-pass method that determines a based-line = . (2) yr sin α cos α yt equation in the target image and extracts all corresponding pixels on the base-line. Floating-point multiplications are performed Determining the rotated point directly using a single to calculate the base-line in the target image, and other line function such as (2) is a one-pass technique, whereas cal- coordinates are calculated using integer addition or subtraction and logical justifications from the base-line pixel coordinates in culating the rotated point using multiple functions such the target image. To avoid a heterogeneous distance between as (3), (4), and (5) is a multi-pass technique. Compared with rotated pixels in the target image, each line rotates to two multi-pass methods, one-pass methods are simple and usually adjacent lines. The proposed method yields good performance more accurate [2], [5]. However, although one-pass methods in terms of speed and quality according to the results of an are accurate, they are still inefficient because multiple analysis of the computation speed and accuracy.
  • Section 6. the Transportation Plan

    Section 6. the Transportation Plan

    2035 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania June 2007 Section 6. The Transportation Plan Like the areas it covers, the needs and opportunities identified in the 2035 Plan are diverse – economic development projects, highways and bridges, transit facilities and operations, and related infrastructure - and must be implemented by an equally diverse collection of public and private agencies. Responsibility for providing funding varies according to the investment type and is shared among multiple taxing authorities and private funding mechanisms. Depending upon the type of infrastructure need, the financial plan for the 2035 Plan identifies the potential funding sources and expectations for funding that are currently known to be available. Where the funding does not adequately address identified needs, the financial plan discusses how the region might achieve the desired funding commitments and identifying possible funding sources. Transportation Financial Plan For public investment in transportation, the 2035 Plan includes a transportation financial plan, which is required by federal and state agencies before public monies can be spent on maintaining and operating the transportation system or making system improvements. Federal funding is under the authority of SAFETEA-LU, the most recent federal transportation legislation, and must follow a prescribed set of rules overseen by the FHWA and FTA. PennDOT and SPC are the agencies responsible for managing the flow of federal transportation funding into the Southwestern Pennsylvania region. State monies are under the authority of the state legislature and are based on multiple state laws supervised and implemented through the State Transportation Commission, PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC). Every two years, as part of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) update process, PennDOT issues official Transportation Program Financial guidance.
  • KC JAZZ STREETCAR ROLLS out for DEBUT the 2021 Art in the Loop KC Streetcar Reveal Set for 4 P.M

    KC JAZZ STREETCAR ROLLS out for DEBUT the 2021 Art in the Loop KC Streetcar Reveal Set for 4 P.M

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 24, 2021 Media Contact: Donna Mandelbaum, KC Streetcar Authority, 816.627.2526 or 816.877.3219 KC JAZZ STREETCAR ROLLS OUT FOR DEBUT The 2021 Art in the Loop KC Streetcar Reveal Set for 4 p.m. Friday. (Kansas City, Missouri) – The sound of local jazz will fill Main Street as the KC Streetcar debuts its latest streetcar wrap in collaboration with Art in the Loop. Around 4 p.m., Friday, June 25., the 2021 Art in the Loop KC “Jazz” Streetcar will debut at the Union Station Streetcar stop located at Pershing and Main Street. In addition to art on the outside of the KC Streetcar, the inside of the streetcar will feature live performances from percussionist Tyree Johnson and Deremé Nskioh on bass guitar. “We are so excited to debut this very special KC Streetcar wrap,” Donna Mandelbaum, communications director with the KC Streetcar Authority said. “This is our fourth “art car” as part of the Art in the Loop program and each year the artists of Kansas City continue to push the boundaries on how to express their creativity on a transit vehicle.” Jazz: The Resilient Spirit of Kansas City was created by Hector E. Garcia, a local artist and illustrator. Garcia worked for Hallmark Cards for many years as an artist and store merchandising designer. As a freelance illustrator, he has exhibited his “Faces of Kansas City Jazz” caricature collections in Kansas City jazz venues such as the Folly Theater and the Gem Theater. In addition to being an artist, Garcia enjoys Kansas City Jazz – both listening to it and playing it on his guitar.
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit

    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit

    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St.
  • The Financial Viability and Sustainability Benefits of Using Cargo Trikes Instead of Vans for ‘Last-Mile’ Logistics in London in the Age of Online Shopping

    The Financial Viability and Sustainability Benefits of Using Cargo Trikes Instead of Vans for ‘Last-Mile’ Logistics in London in the Age of Online Shopping

    The Financial Viability and Sustainability Benefits of Using Cargo Trikes Instead of Vans for ‘Last-Mile’ Logistics in London in the Age of Online Shopping The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Colson, Jeremy R. 2019. The Financial Viability and Sustainability Benefits of Using Cargo Trikes Instead of Vans for ‘Last-Mile’ Logistics in London in the Age of Online Shopping. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42004091 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use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