Click for next page ( 9

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 8
8 CHAPTER 3 Preliminary Case Study Findings This chapter outlines the findings from preliminary case 3. Eastern Contra Costa County Transit Authority (Tri studies completed for 28 transit operators. These preliminary Delta Transit, in California) case studies served multiple roles: 4. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA, in California) They confirmed the range of transit service formats oper- 5. Pierce Transit (in Washington state) ating in suburban environments. 6. Valley Metro (in Arizona) They helped the research team understand how agencies 7. Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB, in evaluate the performance of their transit services. California) They helped the research team identify key issues and 8. King County Metro (Metro, in Washington state) trends facing suburban transit. 9. Denver Regional Transit District (Denver RTD, in They provided the data for the activity surface analysis and Colorado) the land-use analysis. These analyses compared the charac- 10. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District teristics of transit service with characteristics of the subur- (TriMet, in Oregon) ban land form, focusing on the four D's of density, diversity, design, and deterrents to driving. Midwest: A number of techniques were used to select sites for the 11. ChampaignUrbana Mass Transit District (C-UMTD, in preliminary case studies. These techniques included review- Illinois) ing transit agency websites, identifying appropriate sites 12. Des Moines Metropolitan Transit Authority (DMMTA, from the literature search, requesting information via a list- in Iowa) serv, and applying the professional knowledge of the research 13. Madison Metro (in Wisconsin) team regarding various transit properties. From the prelim- 14. Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transporta- inary case studies, select case studies were chosen for detailed tion (SMART, in Michigan) analysis. The final choice of detailed case study locations was 15. Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority (TARTA, in Ohio) done to balance the size and geographical coverage of agen- 16. Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA, in cies, while ensuring that unique programs were also Missouri) included. 17. Metropolitan Council, Minneapolis (in Minnesota) Following is a list of the 28 transit agencies that were part 18. Pace, Suburban Bus Division of the Regional Trans- of the preliminary case studies. The list is organized first by portation Authority (Pace, in Illinois) geographic region (West, Midwest, South, and East) and then by agency size (starting with the smallest agencies). South: West: 19. Broward County, Florida, and municipalities within the county 1. Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA, in 20. Fort Worth Transportation Authority (in Texas) California) 21. Charlotte, North Carolina 2. South Metro Area Rapid Transit (SMART, in Oregon) 22. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART, in Texas)