INTERNATIONAL TRANSIT STUDIES PROGRAM

Transit Cooperative Research ProgramSponsored by the Federal Transit Administration

RESEARCH RESULTS DIGESTOctober 1997-Number 22

Subject Areas: IA Planning and Administration, Responsible Senior Program Officer: Christopher W JenksVI Public Transit, VII Rail

International Transit Studies ProgramReport on 1996 Missions

This TCRP digest summarizes the fourth and fifth missions performed under TCRP Project J-3, "InternationalTransit Studies Program. " The digest includes information on the cities visited, lessons learned, and discussions of

policies and practices that could be used in the United States. This digest was prepared byTracy E. Dunleavy, Eno Transportation Foundation, Inc., the administrator of

the project, on the basis of reports filed by the mission participants.

INTERNATIONAL TRANSIT STUDIESPROGRAM

About the Program

The International Transit Studies Program(ITSP) is part of the Transit Cooperative ResearchProgram (TCRP). The ITSP is managed by the EnoTransportation Foundation under contract to theNational Academy of Sciences (NAS). The TCRPwas authorized by the Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act of 1991. In May 1992,a memorandum of agreement outlining TCRPoperations was signed by the NAS, acting through itsTransportation Research Board (TRB); the TransitDevelopment Corporation, which is the educationand research arm of the American Public TransitAssociation (APTA); and the Federal TransitAdministration (FTA). The TCRP is funded annuallyby a grant from the FTA.

The ITSP is designed to assist in the professionaldevelopment of transit managers, public officials,planners, and others charged with publictransportation responsibilities in the United States.The program accomplishes this objective byproviding opportunities for participants to learn fromforeign experience while expanding their network ofdomestic and

international contacts for addressing publictransportation problems and issues.

The program arranges study missions whereteams of public transportation professionals visittransit operations in other countries. Each studymission has a central theme that encompasses issuesof concern in public transportation. Cites and transitsystems to be visited are selected on the basis of theirability to demonstrate new ideas or uniqueapproaches to handling public transportationchallenges reflected in the study mission's theme.Each study team begins with a briefing beforedeparting on an intensive, 2-week mission. After thisstimulating professional interaction, study teammembers return home with ideas for possibleapplication in their own communities. Teammembers are encouraged to share their internationalexperience and findings with peers in the publictransportation community throughout the UnitedStates. Study mission experience also helps teammembers evaluate current and proposed transitimprovements and identify potential publictransportation research topics.

Study missions normally are conducted in thespring and fall of each year. Study teams consist ofup to 15 individuals, including a senior officialdesignated as the group's spokesperson.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARDNATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

http://www4.nationalacademies.org/trb/crp.nsf/All+Projects/TCRP+J-03

2

CONTENTS

International Transit Studies Program, 1About the Program, 1About the Report, 3

Urban and Regional Bus Operations in SmallerEuropean Cities: Mission 4, May 9-26, 1996, 3

Introduction, 3Switzerland, 4

Unique Transit Features, 4Zurich, 4Schaffhausen, 5Frauenfeld, 5

Austria, 6Dornbirn, 6

Germany, 7Unique Transit Features, 7Lindau, 7Radolfzell, 8Ravensburg, 8Detmold, 9Lemgo, 10Bad Salzuflen, 10Muenster, 10

Belgium, 11Liege, 11Brugge, 12

Netherlands, 13Unique Transit Features, 13Breda, 13Dordrecht, 14Maastricht, 14

Lessons Learned, 15Automobile Restriction, 15Integrated Pricing, 15Marketing and Customer Information, 15Planning, 15Route Design and Operations, 20Technology, 20

Canadian Urban and Regional Transit Innovations:Mission 5, October 14-27, 1996, 20

Introduction, 20Quebec, 20Montreal, 21Ottawa, 22Toronto, 24Calgary, 24Vancouver, 25Victoria, 27Lessons Learned, 27

APPENDIX A: Mission Participants and Their Titles andAffiliations at the Time of the Mission, 33

APPENDIX B: European Hosts Perspective of "WhatThey Do Best," 35

3

Transit properties are contacted directlyand requested to nominate candidatesfor participation. Nominees arescreened by a committee of transitofficials, and the TCRP Project J-3Oversight Panel approves the selection.

Study mission participants are up-and-coming transit managementpersonnel with substantial, sustainedknowledge and experience in transitactivities. Participants mustdemonstrate potential for advancementto higher levels of public transportationresponsibilities. Other selection criteriainclude current responsibilities, careerobjectives, and the probableprofessional development value of themission for the participant andsponsoring employer. Travel expensesfor participants are paid through TCRPProject J-3 funding.

In addition to conducting studymissions, the ITSP administers anindividual travel assistance program,which provides financial assistance toenable individuals engaged in U.S.public transportation management,operations, planning, and research toparticipate in international conferencesand meetings held outside NorthAmerica. Applicants must plan toparticipate in the event as a presenter,discussion leader, panelist, ormoderator.

Additional information about thestudy missions or individual travelawards may be obtained by contactingthe TCRP at 202/334-2886 or the EnoTransportation Foundation at703/7297212.

About the Report

The following report is anoverview of the fourth and fifth studymissions, conducted during the springand fall of 1997, respectively. Thisreport reflects the views of thecontributing participants, who areresponsible for the facts and accuracyof the data presented. The report doesnot necessarily reflect the views of theTCRP, TRB, NAS, APTA, FTA, or theEno Transportation Foundation.

Appendix A lists the names ofstudy mission participants and their

titles and affiliations at the time of theirrespective missions.

URBAN AND REGIONAL BUSOPERATIONS IN SMALLER

EUROPEAN CITIES: MISSION 4,MAY 9-26, 1996

INTRODUCTION

Like their American counterparts,transit planners in small westernEuropean communities face a numberof issues in designing and managingtransit service to meet both market andsocial policy objectives.

To learn about the latest advancesin small city transportation, adelegation of U.S. transit officialsvisited several European countries fromMay 9 through May 26, 1996. Thestudy team visited the following cities:Zurich, Schaffhausen, and Frauenfeld,Switzerland; Dornbirn, Austria;Lindau, Radolfzell, Ravensburg,Detmold, Lemgo, Bad Salzuflen, andMuenster, Germany; Liege and Brugge,Belgium; and Breda, Dordrecht, andMaastricht, Netherlands.

A key purpose of the mission wasto demonstrate the dramatic successesobtained by smaller communities inaltering modal split by introducing orenhancing public transit. The missionlooked at the policy, funding,accessibility, and passengerinformation aspects of several city bussystems, along with their trafficmanagement and retail trade impacts.

In the late 1980s, Europeans werefaced with the decision to create moreroads or reduce automobile traffic.They chose to fund and expand publictransportation with substantial publicinvestment. This has resulted indramatic shifts in travel modes in favorof public transit.

The success of transit systemsduring the past 5 years appears to bethe result of a fundamental shift inviews--from the views of transitsystems and government officials to theviews quickly adopted by the generalpublic. Because of changes in Europeantransportation in the late 1980s,

officials and the general public startedto view public transit as a conveniencefor everyone, not just a necessity forthose without automobiles.

In general, European cities, bothlarge and small, are very denselypopulated in compact areas withhistoric (and thereby a downsized)urban infrastructure. As automobiletraffic increased, outpacing roadwayand parking capacity, the result wastremendous congestion. Many citiesvisited by the study team employedintegrated policies and practices tomitigate the increasing congestion. Keypolicy objectives were to reduce privateautomobile traffic, without adverselyaffecting urban mobility, and toimprove the quality of urban life andcities' economic vitality. This reportdescribes how various European citieshave used specific tools and practices,including the following, to implementtheir transportation and quality-of-lifegoals:

• Signal preemption and intersectionpriority• Dedicated preferential lanes forbuses, bicycles, and pedestrians• Other traffic treatments andstrategies• Automobile-free or restrictedzones for transit and pedestrians• Parking supply and pricing• Special "central city" or centralbusiness district (CBD) strategies• Passenger information systems• Aggressive image campaigns.

The Stadtbus or "City Bus" modelsystems in Germany, Switzerland, andAustria, with some variations inHolland and Belgium, that the studyteam visited were developed to achievemany objectives, including managingtraffic and relieving congestion (seeFigure 1). The study team identified acommon theme among the Stadtbuscities, where increasing automobilecongestion was choking the centralcities with gridlock. This gridlock wasthreatening the quality of life and manyhistorical urban environments. The CityBus systems, such as those in Detmoldand Bad Salzuflen (Germany),Dornbirn (Austria), Dordrecht

4

(Netherlands), and Brugge (Belgium),were key elements of an overall citytransportation plan, withcomprehensive strategies for managingtraffic congestion, enhancing urbanlivability, and stimulating economicvitality.

Although some European systemshave developed imaginative serviceplanning and operating practices thatwarrant emulation in the United States,the study team recognized the distinctcultural, institutional, and historicaldifferences between the Europeancountries visited and the United States.

This study mission was the first toconcentrate on urban and regional busservice. Earlier missions (1994 to 1995)highlighted commuter rail and hightechsystems, intelligent transportationsystems, policy, marketing, and trafficmanagement innovations.

At each site visited, the study teamasked city and transit professionalswhat three things they did best or whatthree things primarily contributed totheir success. Even though the studyteam came back with strongimpressions in areas of technology andpublic policy, most systems pridedthemselves on their passengeramenities, customer information, andfrequency of service. Appendix B listswhat city and transit professionalsconsider to be the most successfulaspects of their systems.

SWITZERLAND

Unique Transit Features

Switzerland established a nationalpolicy that limits the use of cars byrestricting traffic patterns in the CBDsof its cities. In addition, and perhapsequally as important, Switzerlandimposes a gas tax, which contributes tothe high cost of fueling a private car.The gas tax is used as a financial baseto support the cost of operating transitin each of the cities and cantons(cantons are comparable to U.S.counties or regional areas). The peoplein major cities such as Zurich, with itswellintegrated intermodal system,believe that decreased congestion,reduced

noise levels, and improved air qualityare valid reasons for such nationalpolicies.

Increasing costs and attempts toplace a cap on funds allocated to transitfrom tax revenues have led to theprivatization of services in manyEuropean cities. The privatizationmodel is credited to Frauenfeld,Switzerland, where the current Stadtbushas been provided by a privatecontractor since its inception in 1984.The private contractor provides thebuses, drivers, and maintenance. Thecity manages fare policy and providesstreet amenities, marketing, and serviceplanning.

Zurich

Transit Profile

Zurich is the largest city inSwitzerland, with a population of341,000 (1991 estimate). The city'sfastgrowing suburbs have brought thepopulation of the metropolitan area tonearly 1 million.

The canton of Zurich has beenserved by the Zurcher Verkehrsverbund(Zurich Transport Association or ZVV)since 1990. This system is made up ofmore than 40 public and private transitproviders, operating a total of 262commuter rail, light rail, bus and trolleybus, mountain rail, and cable car linesand paddle-wheel lake steamers.

Since a popular referendum in1988 authorized an integrated railnetwork, daily public transit passengertotals have increased by more than one-third in Zurich and by about 14 percentin the ZVV region to just under 1million. The modal split among dailycommuters to Zurich has increasedfrom 50 percent to 59 percent publictransit. Farebox receipts, whichcovering 56 percent of the system'scurrent annual operating costs, amountto SFr 800 million ($715 million); theshortfall is covered equally by thecanton and its 171 communities.Calculation of the local contributionsinvolves a complicated 80/20 formulathat takes into account the number ofdaily departures from station stops in

each community and the community'stax base.

The network contains a total of2,700 route km. The regional rail (SBahn) serves as the main distributor,with 27 station stops inside the citylimits. Neighborhood feeder buses andvans bring passengers to the main stop.

Transit operators in Zurich arevery conscious of air and water qualityand noise control. The system consistsmostly of electrified trams and trolleybuses, but much of the bus fleet isdiesel. A recent proposal called for theelectrification of all bus lines, removingdiesels from the system. Given the veryhigh front-end fixed cost of theoverhead power grid and theconversion or replacement of buses, theproposal was determined to be tooexpensive.

A system objective is to have abus stop within 300 m of each doorstep.Throughout the region, there are morethan 1,400 bus stops, served by morethan 600 buses and trolley busesoperated by 28 companies that togetheroperate more than 30 million km ayear.

Another objective of the Zurich SBahn light rail system is to provide aseat for every passenger. Standing isconsidered an exception to be toleratedonly for brief periods. This requirementreflects the desire for comfortabletravel and an amenable, egalitariantransit environment for all passengers.

There is full-fare integrationthroughout the region, which is dividedinto 45 tariff zones. Zurich uses thehonor system; tickets are purchased offthe vehicle, and fare inspectorsrandomly check tickets. About 35million single, multiple, monthly, andannual tickets are sold each year.According to a study conducted by anindependent research institute, thisworks out to 560 public transit trips perinhabitant per year, a level far abovethat registered by other metropolitanregions in western Europe.

What Could Be Applicable to theUnited States?

In Zurich, the same organization isin charge of transit and land use

5

planning. Coordination of these twofunctions is considered a high priority.Officials are working to increasedensities at commuter rail stations. Inthe long term, they see the need to getpeople closer to transit services, toincrease ridership, and to affect theeconomy in a positive manner.

In the canton of Zurich, the cities,the canton, and the federal governmentmake up the difference between farerevenues and costs. Fares are fullyintegrated. Regional and local busoperators and the federally operated railsystems use the same prepaid farewithin the canton. All revenuescollected in Zurich are retained by theZVV, which reimburses transportcompanies for their costs.

Zurich is a pioneer in prioritizingintersection signals. The country'scomputer system sets traffic signals atintersections throughout Zurich tooptimize transit, automobile, andbicycle flow. The system has specialtransit signals, giving light rail vehicles(trams) and buses special priority.

An innovative program in many ofthe cities studied is a car-sharingarrangement, organized as amembership cooperative, whichfacilitates short-term car rental. Theprogram in Zurich appears to be themost mature. A small fleet of microcarsis based at a rail station. By using aninteractive voice-response telephonesystem, a customer can make areservation for a car at a certain dateand time.

To encourage consumer input,Zurich surveys passengers, nonusers,and businesses for their opinionsregarding routes, headways, andsuggestions for improvements.

Schaffhausen

Transit Profile

Schaffhausen, the capital of thecanton of the same name, has apopulation of 34,000.

The nine-line Schaffhausen urbanpublic transit network (VBSH) carries12 million passengers annually with itsfleet of 30 buses and 13 trolley buses,

which typically run at 10-minheadways. Passenger totals and fareboxreceipts have risen consistently, evenafter fares were raised by 10 percent in1994. Between 1984 and 1994, annualpassenger totals increased from about 9million to 12 million, and during thepast 5 years, annual farebox receiptsrose from about 6 million to 9 millionSwiss francs, the latter of which isequivalent to $7.6 million. Operatingrevenues, including parking andadvertising fees, cover about 60 percentof operating costs.

More than one-third (12,700) ofSchaffhausen's residents purchase amonthly or annual pass for the regionaltransit system, which gives them fullaccess to local and intercity bus,trolley, and commuter rail services.Tickets or passes are sold in all postoffices and at the railway station.Annual pass holders increased morethan 10 percent (to 5,540) last year.The VBSH is very active in the areas ofpassenger information and publicrelations, distributing pocket guidesand schedules to all households,training drivers in customer relations,issuing name tags to all drivers, andinstituting electronic bus stopannouncements in the vehicles. Thesystem operates with a total of 131employees of all categories.


A very sophisticated signalpriority system and on-board (bus)computer system has improved on-timeperformance significantly and producedconsiderable cost savings throughreduced delay. On-board computersprovide a comparison betweenscheduled and actual times at controlpoints and control traffic signals withbus preemption at most intersections.The computer gives buses priority overautomobiles if two or more buses arewaiting at opposite legs of theintersection. The computer assigns ahigher priority to a bus that is behindschedule or that is carrying a higherpassenger load.

In European cities that useoffboard fare collection, it is difficult toobtain a reliable count of customers atthe route or stop level. Some systemsare experimenting with passengercounters. Schaffhausen uses an opticalbeam above each of the doors on 5 ofits 43 buses. This system determinesthe number of passenger boardings bystop. Regional and local bus systemssell their own tickets. However, withinthe city, users can ride the regional orcity bus with either ticket. Theboundaries of the city system coincidewith the zonal boundaries of theregional system.

Like many cities visited,Schaffhausen is already built out. Mostof the city's development is infill,where a high level of transit servicealready exists. The presence of andaccess to public transportation havebecome important criteria for residentsin choosing where to live.

The cost of delivering newschedules annually to homes inSchaffhausen is covered by a localdepartment store's ad, which appears onthe schedule (the bus company alsomakes some money from the ad). Thecity also produces a semiannualnewsletter that is delivered to all homesin the area.

Frauenfeld

Transit Profile

Frauenfeld, a town of 20,000 inhabitants, is one of the smallestcommunities in the study.

The nine-bus system operated forFrauenfeld by a private local firm isoverseen by a city employee. Ridershipgrew from 470,000 passengers in 1982,when the City Bus system waslaunched, to more than 1.4 million lastyear. Intersection priority, someseparate bus lanes, and other designchanges keep buses moving quickly;three wide entry doors and the honorfare system cut dwell time. The clearlymarked hub-and-spoke route systemwith color coding for each line and bus

6

stop make the system easy to use andunderstand.

Advertisers have paid entirely forthe comfortable, covered bus stops withclear and complete schedules andamenities such as seats, publictelephones, mail boxes, and some bikestorage stalls. More than 90 percent ofthe population is served by the six buslines, which leave the main stationtogether at 15-min intervals and returnto the station terminal about 15 minlater. Transferring between lines and toother transit modes, such as trains andregional lines, takes place at theterminal. Children up to the age of 6,blind individuals with their guide dogs,people in wheelchairs, and on-dutymilitary personnel ride free.

Farebox receipts cover about 60percent of operating costs; the balanceis subsidized by the town and canton,currently at a cost of about 4 percent oflocal tax revenues. Frauenfeldpromotes the use of annual passes bydeducting monthly chargesautomatically from patrons' bankaccounts.

The buses are supplemented bythe regional PubliCar on-demandservice. These vans offer a reduced fareto Frauenfeld subscribers. The serviceoperates a nightly service every hourfrom 7:00 to 11:00, leaving the stationand bringing passengers to their homes.

The town of Frauenfeld, likeSchaffhausen and practically all Swisscities, is tied into the larger regionalnetwork of multimodal public andprivate transit providers offeringfullfare integration.


The city has contracted transitoperations to private companies. Theprivate company actually purchasesbuses for the city and provides busoperators and maintenance. Passengerrevenue becomes property of the citywhen collected by the private company.The city then reimburses the companyfor certain expenses. In the event thecity chooses a different company fortransit operations, the

new company would purchase theshares of the other company, includingthe rolling stock. City officials believethat operating a new and expandedservice by a private company is moreefficient than using public employees.They also believe that the motivation toreceive additional contracts willprovide a good incentive for thecontractor to keep costs down andprovide quality service.

One feature of the Frauenfeldsystem that is applicable to the U.S.transit industry is its approach to busstop shelters. A third of all bus stops inthe city have shelters. All stops will beequipped with shelters in the nearfuture.

Although many of the shelters areowned by the city, some are owned byprivate businesses. Under thiscooperative agreement, the initialinvestment comes from the privatesector, which retains ownership andaccepts responsibility for maintainingthe shelter in exchange for the right toadvertise on it. The shelter contains allthe traditional amenities including atelephone, seating, and bicycle racks.The transit system places route mapsand schedule information in the shelter.

AUSTRIA

Dornbirn

Transit Profile

Dornbirn, with a population of42,000, was the only city in Austriavisited. The Dornbirn city bus system,which started in 1991, has beenphenomenally successful. Thesevenline system, which operates only13 buses, grew from 437,000 riders in1991 to more than 3 million riders in1995. The system operates with atimedtransfer pulse system.

In timed-transfer systems in mostcities, all routes are comparable inlength and are assigned a singlevehicle. In Dornbirn, however, one ofthe routes operates at 15-min headwaysall day, and the other six routes operateat half-hour intervals.

A relatively low-tech, low-coststrategy is used in Dornbirn to reducebus emissions. Bus engines are shutdown during pulse layovers (ofapproximately 3 to 5 min) at the centraltransfer hub. This action lowers noiseand minimizes unnecessary dieselfumes and emissions in a concentratedarea.

Part of the city's fleet of 13 busesis owned and maintained by the postalsystem. The city funds bus maintenanceand operation out of its general budget.A private contractor is responsible forsupervising bus operators, ensuring thatschedules are maintained.


Dornbirn has an aggressiveadvertising philosophy: "Get into thenewspaper every week." The transitsystem uses newspapers to thankcustomers, bus operators, the police,and the postal service. The system'sbudget, including cost per capita, ispublished in the newspapers.

The transit system reports that 60percent of its passengers use the annualpass, which costs less than $90.Children under 6 travel free on most ofthe system.

City officials believe that a privatecontractor arrangement is the best wayto manage its new and expanded transitsystem. The private transit manager hasa contract that is subject to renewalevery year, which the city believesprovides a strong incentive for themanager to provide good, strongdirection and management.

A customer service center islocated in a major regional shoppingarea near the main transfer point of thebus lines. The train station is located 2min on foot from the transfer andcustomer center areas. Althoughregional service coordination has notoccurred, regional fare integration hasbeen successful. The customer servicecenter in Dornbirn and thosethroughout the entire region effectivelycommunicate service and fareinformation to riders.

7

GERMANY


The German Stadtwerke(municipal public utility) is a uniquemethod of operating and funding cityservices. The Stadtwerke is a publiclyheld corporation, with 100 percent ofthe shares held by the city, region, orboth. A Stadtwerke is allowed togenerate profits from their operations,which may be used to fund transit andother public services.

In many of the German cities theteam visited, the cities are responsiblefor supplying all utilities includingnatural gas, electricity, and water andsewer. These services are profitable, asthey are in the United States. Municipaladministration of public transit isfrequently located within theStadtwerke. Despite the fact that theprovision of utility services in Germanyis clearly a municipal public enterprise,because it is profitable, the Germangovernment taxes the profits of theStadtwerke. Municipal authorities havefunded transit deficits from the profitsof the municipal utilities to reduce theirfederal taxes.

The cross subsidies received as aresult of activities of the municipalpublic utilities provide a sustainedsource of local funding to operate thecity transit system, or as it is frequentlyreferred to, Stadtbus (City Bus).Although, as indicated previously, thereare many practical reasons foradministering the transit system as anenterprise of the utility system, theStadtwerke model says a lot to citizensabout the role and importance of publictransportation in community life.Public utilities, by definition, areessential to the well-being of thecommunity. By including transitservice within the Stadtwerke, transit isdefined as an essential utility service. Ifapplied in the United States, this modelcould do much to elevate the public'sperception of transit as a utility-likeessential service.

In a number of Germancommunities, some evening service is

provided through a Nachtbus (nightbus) system. A single bus is assigned tocover two or three routes at diminishedfrequency. This is similar to the "owl"service operated in some larger U.S.cities at very late hours.

A more innovative way ofproviding night service in manycommunities is through a taxi servicethat operates solely between bus stops.Customers call the transit systemdispatcher, who contacts a taxi servicedispatcher. Customers are given aconfirmation time and are required toget into the taxi at a bus stop. Anapproaching taxi may contain othercustomers when the customer is pickedup. The fare for this service is usuallytwice the regular route fare, paid to thetaxi driver. The taxi contractor is paidthe difference between the contractprice negotiated with the transitoperator and the fare paid by thecustomer. This system has thebeneficial effect of preservingexclusive-ride taxis as a private(unsubsidized) product, whileproviding some level of mobilityduring low demand times. Further, thetransit operator does not subsidizeexclusive-ride taxi customers throughthis system. This service is calledSammel-taxi (scheduled taxi) inMuenster and Bad Salzuflen.

Lindau

Transit Profile

Lindau is a tourism andconvention center on the northwestshore of Lake Constance, in theGerman state of Bavaria. Lindau has apopulation of 28,000 and is a rail hubon the international trunk linesconnecting Germany, Switzerland, andFrance.

Community leaders decided todramatically increase local publictransportation to reduce automobiletraffic and promote a more pedestrianenvironment in Lindau. In exchange forthe 80 percent capital funding receivedfrom Bavaria, Lindau guaranteed thatits contribution toward providingfunding for operation would remain atthe start-up level.

The four-line city bus system wasinaugurated with a major citywidefestival in October 1994, replacing anearlier limited service. Passenger totalshave increased since then by 500percent to about 6,000 per day.

The system consists of 10lowfloor midibuses custom built byNeoplan (see Figure 2). Operated by aprivate contractor (RBA Augsburg), thebus network features a high-classcorporate image reflected incoordinated interior and exteriordesigns, colors, logo, tickets, andticket-vending machines. Instead ofcommercial advertising, the distinctivecolor-coded buses, with a separatecolor for each line, carry a stylized cityemblem and have helped fostercommunity spirit.

The network comprises about 20mi and covers an estimated 90 percentof all residential districts, with busstops within 200 m of the town's publicoffices, schools, retailers, shoppingcenters, sport complexes, retirementhomes, churches, and industrialfacilities. All 110 bus stops are servedon the hour and half hour from 5:30a.m. to 11:30 p.m. The maximumpoint-to-point transit time in thehuband-spoke system is 27 min. Alllines connect with a central bay in theCBD, departing every 3 min andallowing "painless" transfer betweenthe four lines. Short dwell times andhigh speed are ensured by wide doors,signal priority, and bus stop baysretrofitted along the routes.

During the first full year ofoperations, approximately 900,000route km were operated and more than2,000 annual passes were sold toresidents. Farebox receipts cover abouttwo-thirds of the operating cost. Thecurrent DM 3.6 million ($2.5 million)deficit for the operation is covered withDM 2.2 million ($1.5 million) fromparking revenue, DM 1 million ($0.7million) from the municipal utility, andDM 0.4 million ($0.3 million) from the

8

national government for passengerswith disabilities.


Although many U.S. transitsystems contract for operations, it isunusual for these privatized systems tocontract for management of thecustomer service center. Lindau isprobably the exception in the Europeancommunity as well. The city's transitsystem has a staffed customerservice/information center adjacent tothe central transfer facility. One reasonfor this decision is that the dispatchcenter and customer service center areone and the same. Activities at thismultipurpose center include radiocommunications, vehicle dispatching,dispersing of smart cards and other faremedia, and providing printed scheduleinformation. The facility serves as a"transit store," selling monthly andannual transit passes and other itemssuch as tee-shirts.

As in Dornbirn, Lindau shutsdown bus engines during pulselayovers at the central transfer hub.This reduces noise and minimizesunnecessary diesel fumes andemissions in a concentrated area.

The transit system providesonboard information by displaying"nextstop" information by means of anelectronic, rotating straight-linedrawing that details many stops alongthe route and highlights the next stop(see Figure 3).

In terms of printed information,the system not only delivers schedulesto homes, but also to visitor centers andhiking and backpacking clubs.

Radolfzell

Transit Profile

A regional center of 30,000 with alight industry-based economy,Radolfzell contains many health spasand is a railway and lake shipping hub.

The Radolfzell transit system isoperated for the city by the SouthBaden Regional Bus Company (SBG),

which directs a fleet of 50 buses andleases 75 (see Figure 4). The total fleetof 125 vehicles provides services in atwo-county region.

The weekday passenger total forthe entire fleet is approximately 15,000,which works out annually to more than5.5 million passengers. The systemencompasses 6 million km and hasrevenues of DM 20 million ($14million). The urban service consists ofsix bus lines running with a 15-minheadway during peak periods and at30min intervals the rest of the day. Alllines leave from and return to therailway station. Magnetic-stripfarecards are available in addition toonboard, single-journey tickets.

The SBG operates a "disco bus" toget weekend night owls home safely aswell as a transborder EuroRegion busto link the German border region withMulhouse and Colmar in France andBasel in Switzerland.

The SBG regional maintenancedepot is a state-of-the-art facility thatuses recycled rainwater to wash thevehicles.

Fare integration with thecooperation of all public and privatetransit providers in the county ofKonstanz is now under way. Thisintegration will include urban, regional,intercity, and commuter rail systems.Single-day tickets and discountedweekly, monthly, and annual passesrecently become available.


A key element of the bus systemin Radolfzell is the integration of transitservice with the public and privateparking system. The city increasedparking fees to encourage greatertransit use and inhibit automobile travelin the central city. This successfulstrategy generated additional revenueand saved the cost of providingadditional parking facilities. Theincreased parking revenues and citygeneral funds are used to cover the citybus subsidy.

The central rendezvous transfercenter for the city bus is at the central

rail station, affording closecoordination between the city bus,regional bus, and commuter railwaylines.

Many of the systems studiedprovide transit and other usefulinformation in their next-stopprograms. Radolfzell, for example,displays electronic next-stopinformation and announces theinformation by means of recordings. Interms of printed information,Radolfzell produces a quarterlynewsletter, which it gives only onrequest.

The system prides itself on itsgood image and logo; passengers thinkin terms of the system as "our bus."

Ravensburg

Transit Profile

A large county seat and regionalshopping center serving an agriculturalregion, Ravensburg has a population of45,000.

To restore the old city topedestrian use, through traffic wasbanned in 1986 and an undergroundgarage for 400 cars was excavatedunder the traffic-restrained main squarein 1989. By 1990, the entire old townwas designated as a traffic-restrainedzone, paved with cobblestones forpedestrians and concrete blocks tochannel residual traffic flow. At thesame time, major renovation projectsbacked by community groups restoredthe facades and connected groups of15th-century houses to create a citymuseum documenting life inRavensburg over the centuries.

To retain its position as a regionalshopping center while reducing thenumber of cars in the city, Ravensburgadded private train service to connectits nine local bus lines with other citiesin the region.

The bus system, operated by thecity's public utility department, has 33relatively new buses (average age is 3years). In 1995, the fleet carried a totalof 4.2 million passengers. Fareboxcoverage of operating costs currentlystands at 77 percent, and the DM 2.2million ($1.6 million) annual shortfallis

9

covered by internal cross subsidiesfrom profitable gas, water, heating, andparking operations.

The bus system prides itself onlean management; clean, comfortableequipment; and a uniform colorscheme.


The transit systems studied aregoing to great lengths to encouragepass use. Single-ride tickets have apremium charge, especially ifpurchased on the bus. Some cities areexperimenting with "chip cards."Ravensburg is exploring a chip card fora range of municipal services, includingdowntown garage parking and use ofthe swimming pool.

Because of the linear nature of thecity and region and its location,Ravensburg has no central hub for allmodes. However, users can take thelight rail system from Ravensburg tothe next regional city, where they canlink with the Lake Constance ferry toSwitzerland. There also are 20 busconnections daily in each directionlinking Ravensburg with the GermanNational Railway.

Traffic has been banned from theold city center, making the area a vitaltransit- and pedestrian-only place. Thezone is effective, but there are concernsabout traffic conflicts between busesand pedestrians.

Ravensburg's newsletter isdelivered to households and is availableon the trains.

Detmold

Transit Profile

Detmold, a city of 70,000, is theadministrative center for the state ofNorth Rhine Westphalia.

Since the fall of 1994, a fleet of 18midsize Neoplan buses has beenproviding a four-line city bus servicewith a 15-min headway during peakperiods and 30-min intervals the rest ofthe day. The city operates the bus lines,but fleet maintenance has beencontracted to a regional operator. Since

the start of the system, monthlypassenger totals have trebled to180,000.

The city's traffic plan aims atsubstantially reducing private car useduring the next 10 years by promotingan attractive, comfortable, speedy, andeconomical city bus service. Monthlyfare cards are available for as little asDM 25 ($17), and a chip cardelectronic purse is being phased in forboth public transit and parking fee uses.

The Detmold City Bus networkand the two other city bus systems arelinked with the regionalVerkehrsgemeinschaft Lippe, whichincludes 12 independent serviceproviders. The public and privatemembers of this transit associationcumulatively control and operate a fleetof several hundred buses. Full-fareintegration is practiced in the region,with many ticket and pass options. Oneof the most interesting is a monthly"job ticket" bought by companies fortheir employees as a fringe benefit. Forclose-by areas, it costs about $16; theprice goes up the longer the commute.


Each of Detmold's Neoplan busesis equipped with electronic route maps.These visible, colorful displays, locatedtoward the front of the bus (on the sidebehind the driver), depict routeinformation for riders. The displayshows the progression of stops, withthe upcoming one appearing in adifferent color than the rest. Thedisplay changes automatically once thebus departs each stop.

Even though other Europeansystems also display route informationon board, this technology offers thedistinct advantage of providing riderswith continuous route information.Detmold's technology might beexplored by U.S. transit systems,particularly systems with longer routelengths and many stops. Transfer pointscould also be depicted on the electronicmap.

Special accommodations havebeen made at bus stops for visuallyimpaired riders, such as special curb

cuts and textured brick on sidewalks.An audible signal at the intersectiontells the visually impaired individualswhen it is safe to cross the street.

Many European systems use signposts instead of traditional bus stopsigns to communicate information.These systems take great care indetermining both the location anddesign of the sign posts. The signs arealways color-coded (see Figure 5), andin most communities, with theexception of express services, posts arelocated 200 to 300 ft apart. The designoften includes a route map andschedule (headways) information.

In Detmold, the sign posts depictboth route and schedule information.All four routes are color coded. Thepost is color coordinated with the busesand timetables. In addition, the routesand schedules are shown in amultiplefold, easy-to-read flyer.Although sign posts cost a little morethan traditional signs, they areaesthetically pleasing to smallercommunities. More information can bemade available to the rider on signposts, which makes them a goodinvestment for some smaller U.S.transit systems.

Managing parking supply andpricing is used by some of the citiesvisited to reduce automobile traffic andcongestion and to make public transituse an even more attractive alternative.In the 1980s and early 1990s, Detmoldexperienced very serious automobilecongestion. During that period, busservice was poor, and parking was free.The city's primary objective ininitiating a new expanded city bussystem was to mitigate growing levelsof automobile traffic and resultingpeak-period gridlock. The cityintegrated the new bus system with aparking management policy thatincluded increasing parking fees to helpfund the transit subsidy (to cover coststhat exceed fare revenues). Detmold isexperimenting with chip cards that alsowill be used for parking meters.

The system's marketingphilosophy is that it must do somethingto get people to ride the bus. Thesystem increased the frequency ofbuses and introduced a reduced fare; itallowed

10

two adults and three children to ride onweekends with a monthly pass. Whenthe transit system started, it organized amarketing campaign and offered awatch with the system's logo as the firstmonthly pass (which was good for thefirst 2 months). It also used historicDetmold money as a monthly pass.

Previous schedules were verycomplicated, large, and cumbersome. Aseparate card has been printed for oneroute, and the operator plans to do thisfor all the routes. There is a plan for aguaranteed ride home, a subsidized taxiride, for all passengers.

A passenger survey conducted inDetmold found that passengers wantedthe same upgrades often requested frompassengers in the United States: morefrequent service, affordable fares, fastand comfortable buses, easilyunderstood schedules, and reliable andfriendly service.

Lemgo

Transit Profile

In Lemgo, which has a populationof 42,000, bus ridership soared from40,000 to more than 1.4 million in 1year after the City Bus was introducedin the fall of 1994. The three Lemgolines, each between 5 and 6 mi inlength, are operated by a private serviceprovider under contract to the city. Thelines depart from a central transferpoint in the innercity every half houruntil 7:00 p.m. Afterward, a collectivetaxi service transports passengers, atdiscounted fares, until after midnight.

The Lemgo transit system isowned by the city and cross-subsidizedwith city revenue from other utilities,including electricity, gas, and waterservices.

In a recent user survey conductedby an independent agency,approximately 40 percent of City Buspassengers said that they formerly usedheir private cars to make shopping tripsin the city.


The transit system in Lemgo setup large-lettered, easy-to-read signs atbus stops. The signs include the nameof the bus stop and when the busleaves.

In most of the countries visited,the bus route name and number areelectronically displayed on the front ofbuses and the bus route number isdisplayed on the rear. In Lemgo, theroute number is also displayed on theside of the bus. The system currentlyoperates above its peak-period capacityduring most months.

Bad Salzuflen

Transit Profile

Bad Salzuflen has a population of56,000. The four-line Bad SalzuflenCity Bus system, introduced inSeptember 1994, almost tripled itsridership to nearly 1 million during itsfirst year of operation. A quarter of thenew passengers formerly used theirown cars for trips to and within thecity.

Described as a "quantum leap"over the previous public transitsituation, the City Bus system operateswith comfortable, lightweight, andenergy-efficient midsize "metroliners,"a carbon-fiber vehicle developed byNeoplan (see Figure 6).

Buses traverse the pedestrianizedCBD until 7:00 p.m.; collective taxisare used until midnight.

A local private service provideroperates the system under thesupervision of the city's public worksdepartment. The system, which is basedon the Dornbirn (Austria) model, ischaracterized by a central transfer bayin the heart of the shopping district,where all interline transfers take place.About 70 percent of the city's residentslive within 300 m of one of the new busstops.


Like many transit systems visited,the Bad Salzuflen system takes greatpride in offering convenient customerservice centers with useful,servicerelated information. The systemoffers a model customer service centerin a regional shopping area, with acentral transfer point one block fromthe center. The center providescustomers with seating and otheramenities. Trained staff sell passes andtickets, disseminate schedules, andhandle passenger inquiries andcomplaints. Regional information isalso provided.

The shelters, buses, customerservice center, printed passengerinformation, and signage are all colorcoordinated, highly visible, andattractive. Schedules and routeinformation are tastefully depicted onbuses, shelters, and customer servicecenters.

Trip cards illustrate schedule anddetailed route information. A route maplisting all bus stops and the number ofthe line (i.e., route number) appears onone side of the card; a timetableappears on the other side.

The Bad Salzuflen system hasachieved regional service coordinationand fare integration and has reduced thenumber of cars in the city center byone-half by imposing a limited autozone.

Muenster

Transit Profile

Located in the center of theMuenster region, this city of 280,000 isone of Germany's most livable andenvironment-conscious communities.The university and its students are aprominent factor in the city, andbicycle traffic constitutes aboutonethird of all vehicle trips.

11

Two remarkable statistics put intoperspective the role of the Muenstertransit fleet:

• In 1995, the 20-line system withits 113 buses, 51 of which arearticulated, carried more than 30million riders over its route length of334 km (207 mi), almost double the 17million carried in 1989.

• The modal split shows that 56percent of Muenster residents walk (24percent) or bike (32 percent) to work orschool. Eleven percent take publictransit.

Students who use the system'sunique "semester pass" account for 16percent (4.6 million) of the Muenstertransit system's bus ridership. Use ofthe system by local residents hasincreased steadily in the 1990s. From1994 to 1995, passenger numbers rosefrom 28.8 to 30.2 million or about 150rides per resident per year. Thisincrease is due in large part tosuccessful public relations and marketsegmentation. Various kinds of flashpasses for employees, students, seniors,and family groups are activelymarketed.

Farebox coverage of operatingcosts reached 64 percent in 1994, thelast year for which an annual report isavailable. The shortfall was covered bycross-subsidies from the municipalutility, a widely used German model.


In Muenster, a relatively largecity, several routes converge alongcertain corridors. Great care isexercised in scheduling these routes sothat buses do not bunch either inboundor outbound. This increases thefrequency on the segments of the streetnetwork served by more than one route.

Muenster has express and limitedstop operations. This is importantbecause local transit travel speeds aretypically lower than in the UnitedStates. (Despite longer interstopdistances, off-board fare collection, anddecreased traffic congestion, routes are

often on narrow streets and the highlevel of customer boardings tend toreduce travel speeds.) In Muenster, afew routes operate city-express servicein which every other bus withshortheadway (10-min) routes skips anumber of stops. These supplementalbuses do not operate during thesummer.

The study team viewed examplesof preferential treatment fornonautomobile transportation modes,including dedicated lanes for buses,bicycles, and pedestrians. Muenstercontains a very extensive system ofpreferential transportation treatments.Muenster's bicycle mode share is 32percent-much higher than in otherGerman cities. Its major system of buslanes (which allow taxis), bike paths,and pedestrian trails is integrated with avery sophisticated traffic signal system,including priority left traffic lanes forbuses. This signal system optimizes thecontinuity of bus lanes by allowing"protected" right turns by buses leavinga bus lane across adjacent mixed-flowtraffic lanes. Traffic is stopped and thebuses have the ability to move to the farright lane to board and alightpassengers.

An issue Muenster is dealing withis the peaceful coexistence betweenbuses and bicycles, avoiding trafficconflicts where bicycles use bus lanes,and, in one case seen by the study team,where buses use a wide bicycle lane.

New concepts are emerging innew suburban developments such asbus-only streets, which separate busand automobile traffic to increasetransit operating speeds.

Scheduled taxi routes operateduring the day in low-density areas atthe end of three of the routes. Theseoperate hourly and pulse at the outerterminal of the routes they serve. Thebus operator may call a taxi on behalfof customers so that they can completetheir journey.

Muenster prints schedules thatinclude information for city andregional buses as well as railroads andairlines.

In the "old town" center, parkingfees have increased and major

improvements in transit service havetaken place. A concept underconsideration is to close the central areacompletely to private automobiles.

In larger cities such as Muenster,the significant increase in transitservice was largely driven by strictfederal laws governing air quality andnoise as well as traffic and congestionmitigation.

The transit system planned anddeveloped a number of park-and-ridelocations on the outskirts of the city.The areas were designed with a numberof passenger amenities including busshelters. What is particularly appealingabout these shelters is the voluminousinformation pertaining not just to thetransit system and its routes, but also tothe city, events, restaurants, and taxiservices. The shelter walls depict anarray of information for the transitrider, which makes transit even moreconvenient and appealing.

BELGIUM

Liege

Transit Profile

Situated on the Meuse River nearthe rich coal fields of the MeuseValley, the city of Liege is one of thechief manufacturing centers inBelgium.

A total of 16 transit providersform a public-private association,known as the TEC Group, which servesthe city and surrounding region of 84communities. Transit systems includefixed-route urban and intercity services,school buses, and paratransit forindividuals with disabilities. The TECGroup operates 187 bus lines in theregion, using a total of 705 buses, 54 ofwhich are articulated.

Passenger totals amount to morethan 80 million annually, operatingcosts are approximately $128 million,and farebox and other receipts totalabout $58 million. This leaves about$70 million in subsidies from the local,provincial, and national governments.

The TEC Group is very active inmarketing and promotion and offersfree rides during the "car-free Sunday"

12

campaign. Graffiti and vandalism aresizable problems that are being tackledby a variety of initiatives.


Transit officials in Liege believethat there is not enough coordinationbetween planning and transit servicedesign and delivery. The officialsbelieve that the central city is losingjobs and that markets and housing arespreading into the outskirts, which aredifficult to get to by bus. They note thatmore commuter-focused transit serviceis needed, with more bus lanes andpark-and-ride facilities, all fullyintegrated into the planning of newresidential and commercialdevelopments.

Liege officials are frustrated thatthe street network in new residentialareas are labyrinths, very difficult toserve with transit, but where peoplewant to live.

A massive project is in progress inthe city's Central Plaza area, in which anew center to link CBD modes oftransport at the Central Plaza will beestablished. The project, known asPlace St. Lambert, is designed to (1)replace a motorway project; (2) elevatethe bus transfer center to street leveland move car traffic below grade; (3)add a 2,000-space underground parkinggarage; and (4) construct buildings overthe adjacent railway station so thathomes, shops, and offices return to thearea to bring back to the CBDeverything that makes a city comealive.

The facility is designed to bepeople-friendly and to protect theheritage and history of the site, whichdates back to Roman occupation. Thecity believes that public transit, whichwill link pedestrian travel toautomobile parking and tie bus routesto rail lines, can be a catalyst foreconomic development around thecentral city transit center.

Some observers are concerned thatthe project does not fully support publictransportation policy objectives.

Specifically, they are concerned that (1)splitting up bus transfer locationswithin the plaza will be less convenientto transit users;(2) the intermodal connection betweenbuses and trains will not be convenientenough; and (3) expanding parkingcapacity in the CBD will increasecongestion. The project is a result ofnegotiation and political compromise,and it is hoped that it will enhance thequality of life in and economic vitalityof Liege.

This industrial city is dealing withmuch pollution. The transit systemoperates a large diesel bus fleet withthree experimental compressed naturalgas (CNG) buses. CNG buses are muchmore expensive than diesel buses (fiveCNG buses cost the same as seven oreight diesel buses). Transit officials areseeking to measure the overallenvironmental benefit of operatingmore diesel buses, which have thepotential to eliminate more cars, againstoperating fewer, cleaner-burning CNGbuses, which will result in fewer busservice hours because of the buses' highcost.

The maintenance facility is opento the public on Sundays for tours.Transit officials believe this allows thepublic to better understand transit andraises the community's awareness ofthe system.

Brugge

Transit Profile

A city of 118,000, Brugge islocated on the low coastal plain 55 minorthwest of Brussels and 8 mi fromthe North Sea.

De Lijn, a single regional systemthat serves the entire province,including Brugge as its center, ischaracterized by total fare integrationamong its urban and interurban bus andrail systems. Ridership has increasedsubstantially since 1990 when theindependent private transit providersserving the region merged to form asingle transit association.

New services include dial-a-ride inthe countryside and high-speed express

buses for commuters to Brugge andother cities in the province. De Lijn,which has successively built a series offringe lots on the outskirts of Brugge,has been actively promoting theparkand-ride concept since 1991. Thisinitiative reportedly has resulted in a 40percent increase in transit use bycommuters, with resulting benefits forthe fragile urban environment. Thenational government has contractedwith De Lijn for pilot projects to dealwith traffic congestion in CBDsthrough the use of intelligenttransportation system (ITS)technologies, including improvedcommunication, intersection priority,and realtime passenger informationsystems.


A 1,600-space park-and-ridegarage was constructed outside thecentral core area next to the train/busstation (a 20min walk or a 5-min busride to the core). For $3 a day, userscan park their cars, and all occupants ofa vehicle (up to 5) can ride free to andfrom the core area.

This facility, coupled with 2-minheadway transit service to and from thecore area, has made a major dent inrelieving serious automobile congestionin the delicate medieval city center andcommercial district. This strategy wascomplemented with other transitservice improvements (10-minheadways on main roads and 20-minheadways in the outskirts) and verylimited automobile access to the corearea, including no automobile trafficallowed in the core itself. Thisdramatically reduced automobile trafficand parking in the CBD, leavingBrugge a vital, attractive, and livableurban center.

Headquartered in Brugge, De Lijn,one of three regional transit companies,is known for its innovative marketingstrategies and customer informationsystems. One strategy that provedsuccessful for this operation was the"Info Bus." Info Buses are located inmany places downtown and are staffed

13

with a driver and customer servicerepresentative.

The bus offers customized tripinformation. The concept wasdeveloped by an in-house cross-functional employee team andpromoted by mass mailings toindividual households in the servicearea. Some of the information availableon the Info Bus include a map of theregional transit network, a leaflet withbus stop and personalized tripinformation for districts, and regionaltransfer information.

Ten thousand people visited theInfo Buses. Although success is notmeasured in terms of new ridership, theregional operator believes that a certainpercentage of significant growth inridership can be attributed to InfoBuses. The transit company plans toextend this marketing strategy to otherareas within the region.

The Info Bus concept might bebeneficial to U.S. systems that arerestructuring their service, expandingservice, and/or undertaking targetmarketing campaigns to increaseridership and revenue.

The transit system's marketingcampaign has featured free rides on a"shopping bus" on weekends inDecember and allowing senior citizensto ride free for 1 month on Wednesdaysand Sundays. The officials' philosophyis to offer special promotions everyyear to keep ridership growing andmake the town center more livable.

NETHERLANDS


One of the most impressivepassenger information systems wasfound in the Netherlands. The countryhas completely integrated train, bus,and tram transport systems informationon a national level using a technologyreferred to as "the traveler's friend" orde reiswizer. The technology isaccessible and easy to use.

Riders simply insert a phone cardinto a machine and choose in which

language they prefer their tripinformation: Dutch or English. Therider follows a simple set ofinstructions as they appear on thedisplay (e.g., to enter destinationaddress and arrival time). If thedeparture point is not from the rider'scurrent location, he or she can enter adifferent pick-up point.

Once the information is enteredinto the computer, the rider will see adisplay depicting all the details for hisor her trip, including the travel mode(train, bus, or tram). The rider canaccept or reject the trip optionpresented. If accepted, the set ofinstructions appearing on the screencan be printed for the rider to carry. Abrochure (in English and Dutch)describing this technology is availableat a number of locations throughout thecountry, including all train stations. Anominal fee is debited from the rider'sphone card each time the trip planner isused.

A rider may also call a nationwide800 number to obtain trip informationfrom customer service staff who use dereiswizer to provide accurateinformation to riders who are callingfrom home and others who do not havedirect access to the service.

This type of technology offersincredible convenience to riders.Although cost information was notreadily available, any cost-benefitanalysis undertaken would need toconsider the cost savings in personnelwho would normally process automatedtrip requests and cost savings resultingfrom the expediency of customerservice personnel in handling calls onthe nationwide 800 number.

The Netherlands has standardizedthe national transit fare structure usingthe Strippenkaarten (see Figure 7). Thesame ticket can be used anywhere inthe country for any given number ofzones. Strippenkaart vending machinesare located in train stations, busstations, and shopping districts. Toredistribute fare revenue, a nationalsurvey is taken periodically todetermine the share of revenue aparticularly carrier is to receive.

The Netherlands has tied landdevelopment into the quality of transitservice. In its land use planningprocesses, the country has codified aclear priority for approvingdevelopments with public transitaccess. The country is divided intothree types of zones:

1. Zone Category A: Locations withexcellent public transit service2. Zone Category B: Locations withsufficient public transit services, butthat can be reached by automobile3. Zone Category C:Automobileoriented locations withvirtually no transit

When developers want to buildhousing or nonresidential projects (i.e.,retail, commercial, and industrial),governmental preference in grantingapproval is given to projects incategories A and B. This is part of theNetherlands national policy onintegrating land development withpublic transportation service andinfrastructure development.

Breda

Transit Profile

This border city of 102,000, nextto the Belgian frontier, is known as apleasant residential and light industryarea with much cross-border traffic.

The publicly owned BBA isresponsible for transit in Breda andregional transit in the province ofBrabant, including the midsize city ofDen Bosch. The BBA fleet consists of460 buses; 130 operate in the city, and330 operate in the region. Dailypassenger totals are approximately160,000.

In addition to fixed-route service,a subsidiary of BBA operates theexpress "Interliner," a luxurious higherrate regional commuter service, as wellas a dial-a-ride service for individualswith disabilities. BBA also works withprivate taxi firms to provide after-hoursdoor-to-door service.

14


In Breda, the BBA bus system is aleader in operating liquified petroleumgas (LPG) buses. LPG is common inHolland. All new BBA buses are LPGpowered; by the year 2000, all BBAcity buses will burn LPG. Regionalbuses will still burn diesel fuel. BBAofficials report that LPG buses arequieter, cleaner burning, and bettersmelling and provide improvedacceleration. Concern for theenvironment is part of the BBAmission; however, the LPG focus isalso driven by the desire to maintain anedge in the very competitive publictransportation business environment inthe Netherlands.

Breda transit officials face adilemma. From an outside perspective,parking prices are high, but still too lowrelative to transit fares. From a localbusiness perspective, if parking ratesare too high, people will do business intowns that compete with Breda.

The transit system runs a "PhoneBus" service, which is operated by taxisunder contract with the bus company.The system, which is initiated by riderswho call, uses vans to transport riderswho do not live on regular bus routes.These vans are less expensive tooperate than fixed-route buses in lowridership areas. The system alsoprovides a village bus using volunteerdrivers in small villages. This bus isless expensive to operate than thePhone Bus in even lower ridershipareas. The village bus does not operatein the same areas as the Phone Bus.The system sells advertising on itsbuses for revenue, uses propane insome buses, and provides visual andaudio stop announcements on thebuses.

The transit system has undertakenan aggressive campaign to eliminategraffiti on buses. A specialist was hiredto investigate each incident of graffiti.Photographs are taken each time newgraffiti is identified. Because vandalsrepeatedly use most of the graffitisymbols, the specialist can ride the busand catch the individuals in the act.

Perpetrators are fined and forcedto perform community service bycleaning buses. If the individual is aminor, the parents can also be fined.Second offenses are consideredcriminal in nature. Local lawmakerswere very cooperative by passinglegislation. Graffiti declined by 60percent in the first year. Thisaggressive strategy has also improvedthe image of the transit system in thecommunity.

Dordrecht

Transit Profile

Situated along the Maas River,Dordrecht has a population of 100,000.

The City Transit Company, whichis tied into the regional network,operates a fleet of 45 midsize low-floorbuses with a staff of 207. Midsize buseswere selected to improvemaneuverability around the narrowstreets of the old town area. Fixed-routeservices are offered in the urban area,and the city promotes park-and-ridefringe lots outside the historic center toease traffic congestion. Reduced faresand free transfers among bus lines areoffered to drivers who park in thefringe lots.

Dordrecht also operates acomplementary commuter and ruraldistrict service with low-floor busesthat have room for passengers' handluggage. The bus driver stops in thecountryside on demand anywhere alongthe route, not only at designated stops.


Although the Netherlands hasstrong transit laws and policies, manyofficials agree that the country needs toestablish more examples of proactivepublic transit that is integrated withland use planning and developmentdesign. An example of this is a newresidential development outsideDordrecht in a semirural area. New buslanes were built and transit service hasbeen provided into the city since thedevelopment opened. The idea was toget new residents into the "transit

habit" right away--before theydeveloped the "automobile habit."

The bicycle and pedestrian cultureof the European communities visitedwas very evident. Biking and walkingare major modes of transportation.Some creative solutions in Dordrecht tofurther reduce private automobile travelinclude factories that provide bicyclesto employees if they live within 3 kmof the work site.

Maastricht

Transit Profile

Maastricht, the capital of theNetherlands province of Limburg, has apopulation of 85,000.

The Maastricht City Bus service,which was privatized in January 1994,is unique in that it offers transborderservice between Maastricht in theNetherlands and Hasselt in Belgium.The fleet comprises 63 buses; staffmembers total 225.

City Bus offers a variety ofservices, including paratransit and dial-a-ride vans, which used to be offeredonly to persons with disabilities, butrecently have been made available toall residents willing to pay a premiumfare for door-to-door service.

The goal of the City Bus system isto fully integrate bus and collective taxiservices, which are operated by thesame private company. Companyofficials state that since privatization,cost savings of more than 40 percenthave been attained.

Among the Stadtbus marketinginitiatives partly responsible forimproving financial performance are(1) the weekend "2-for-1" pass, (2) apromotion offered in conjunction withlocal department stores, (3) job ticketsmarketed to employers, (4) a tie-in withthe cultural center to offer combinedtickets and bus passes for eachperformance, and (5) night taxis forcarnival revelers.

City Bus also operates a luxury,high-speed, limited-stop expressservice for commuters. Because theexpress bus benefits from intersectionpriority, the

15

bus gets commuters to theirdestinations more quickly than aprivate car does.


In 1994, Stadtbus Maastricht, apublic operator for 75 years, wasestablished as a public corporation,with 100 percent of its shares held bythe city of Maastricht. Some hadanticipated that Stadtbus Maastrichtand the regional operator, also a publiccorporation whose shares are held bythe region, would be the onlyparticipants in the demonstrationproject-the competitive offering of theregional bus service. However, a newfirm, Vancom Netherlands, wasawarded the contract for service.Vancom began providing service inJune 1995 as a joint venture withStadtbus Maastricht.

Characteristics of the privatesectorcontractors include the following:

• Lower labor costs and greaterflexibility in labor practices (i.e.,mechanics who drive during peak-hourruns and bus operators who get onlyone relief period in a full shift); and

• Generation of necessary capitaland streamlined purchasing procedures.

European Union directives will opencompetition among providersEuropewide. Municipal and regionalgovernments are becoming more theprocurers of services and less theproviders of services.

In Maastricht many routesconverge on a segment of the mainstreet between the rail station anddowntown. Schedules are coordinatedso that frequencies along the "mainaxis" are comparable to subways--every 2 to 3 min.

LESSONS LEARNED

To decrease automobilecongestion, American cities and transit

systems can consider the followingactions.

Automobile Restriction

• Use pedestrian zones orautomobile-restricted areas incongested areas.• Enact more stringent local andregional policies that restrictautomobile use and increase publictransit services, which would make abus trip more competitive regionwide.• Establish automobile-free orautomobile-limited zones, particularlyin local areas with very poor air quality,in conjunction with highfrequencytransit service to and from park-and-ride lots.

Integrated Pricing

• Increase parking ratesincrementally in the short term, butwork toward "market-rate" levels in thelong term.• Improve transit service levels inconjunction with raising parking rates,initiating some cross-subsidy funding.• Establish a system in which thecity's "customers" or "clients" payreduced short-term parking rates andpeople who work in the city and otherswho park for significant lengths of timepay full market rates.

Marketing and CustomerInformation

• Use automated transit passdispensers and chip, prepaid, and zonecards to simplify the purchase ofmonthly transit passes.• Market transit passes to localuniversities as part of general studentfees. In return, the university canadvertise on the fare cards.• Direct customer servicerepresentatives at transit systems toprovide the schedules and telephonenumbers of other transportation modes(e.g., Greyhound and other intercity buslines, Amtrak, airport limousines, andtaxis).

• Communicate with representativesfrom other modes to identify scheduleand route adjustments that wouldenhance service to mutual customers.• Mail transit schedules to allresidents on a frequent basis.• Communicate on an ongoing basiswith representatives from all modes tooptimize system integration; identifystructural changes in routes andschedules that will improve customerconvenience and make a complete tripmore competitive with automobiletravel.

Planning

• Establish close workingrelationships among public transitproviders; city, county, and regionalplanning departments; and localdevelopers and architects. This willfacilitate opportunities to learn aboutland use planning and developmentdesign attributes that complement andsupport public transit and other criticalservices. Collectively identify potentialchanges in laws and ordinances thatwould help public transportation meetbroader urban and regional objectives.• Routinely review plans anddesigns for new residential, retail, andcommercial developments. Providecomments regarding the project'scompatibility with the delivery ofpublic transportation services. Transitproviders can get involved incomprehensive land use andtransportation planning on the city,county, and regional levels and provideinput as early (and often) in the processas possible.• Build a long-term constituency(based on the initial efforts describedpreviously) to engage planningdepartments, developers, and architectsin integrating the vital links amongpublic transportation service delivery,land use planning, and developmentdesign. This will go a long way towardachieving the larger community goalsof economic vitality, quality of life, andlong-term sustainability. Engage andinvolve elected officials and planningcommissioners in this long-term

16

Figure 1.Stadtbus bus stop sign on an automobile-free street in Frauenfeld, Switzerland, emphasizes community pride.

Figure 2. Low-floor "midibus "passing through the narrow streets of Lindau, Germany

17

Figure 3. Onboard electronic next-stop information display.

Figure 4. Operator compartment, with onboard electronics, on bus in Radolfzell, Germany.

18

Figure 5. (Top and Bottom) Color-coded bus stop sign posts in Dornbirn, Austria.

19

Figure 6. Mid-size low-floor bus in Bad Salzuflen, Germany.

Figure 7. Strippenkaarten vending machine in thNetherlands.

20

process, working toward changes inattitudes, laws, and practices.• Consider inclusion of bus andHOV lanes and bicycle paths in all newroadway and roadway expansionprojects.• Develop a constituency forautomobile-free zones that are fortransit and pedestrian use only. Educatecitizens and the business community onthe benefits of these zones to thecommunity and commerce.• Link complementary modes whensiting and designing new or expandedtransportation facilities.

Route Design and Operations

• For small transit systems, drawfrom the central terminal conceptwhere all trips originate and end.• Establish signal preemptionsystems, providing intersection priorityto buses at critical bottlenecks. Startsmall and build on successes,expanding the system in the long termto include more intersections andintegration with transit-only HOVlanes.• Where rights-of-way exist,establish bicycle lanes on majorarterials, providing bicycle-friendlyamenities such as racks, lockers, andshowers in close proximity to majordestinations.• Develop high-frequency transitcorridors, linked with a system ofperipheral park-and-ride lots servingareas of high congestion; coordinatepricing with "market" pricing of publicparking; and expand cross-subsidybetween parking revenues and transitservice costs.• Shut down bus engines forlayovers longer than 5 min.

Technology

• Purchase products and vehiclesthat feature European-style technologyand vehicle design. Pertinent Europeanstyles include perfected low-floorbuses, convenient vehicle-doorlocations, automatic passenger countingsystems, improved bus operator drivingareas

with computerized digital panels andmoveable steering columns, andovernight battery-operated heatingsystems.• Use signal preemption technologyfor bus priority.

CANADIAN URBAN ANDREGIONAL TRANSIT

INNOVATIONS: MISSION 5,OCTOBER 14-27, 1996

INTRODUCTION

Canadian transit historically hashad a well-deserved reputation forefficiency and effectiveness. Sometransit factors are unique to Canadiansociety and governance, but many ideascan be used in the United States. Manylessons learned from the Canadiantransit system experience appear to beuseful for enhancing the quality of theU.S. environment and U.S. transitservices. Canadian agencies areproactive to development, viewdevelopment associated with transitinvestments in the long term, and havekept their transit systems simple.

While many transit strategies werefamiliar, it was the commitment tomake strategies work, the pursuit ofseveral strategies concurrently, and theoverall community desire to meet thearea's transportation needs principallythrough transit that seem to makeCanadian transit efforts very effective.

The fifth study mission under theITSP focused on model Canadianmetropolitan and commuter rail, urbanbus, infrastructure, and transit/land usedevelopments. The team visited majoroperations, production, andmaintenance facilities throughoutCanada and brought back serviceimprovement and productivity ideasrelevant to U.S. public transit.

Transit systems in Quebec,Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary,Vancouver, and Victoria and twoproduction facilities were visited duringthis 2-week, coast-to-coast study.

QUEBEC

Transit Profile

Quebec, the capital of theCanadian province of Quebec, has apopulation of 168,000; the metropolitanarea has 646,000 residents.

Transit service in the city andmost of its surrounding region isprovided by the Societe de transport dela communaute urbaine de Quebec(STCUQ), which serves a population of448,000 in a service area of 478 sq km.In 1994, 322 million passengers werecarried by STCUQ's fleet of 488 buses.

The system features two Metrobusroutes, which provide frequent andrapid service along two major corridorsthrough the city. Metrobus routes areon regular streets, often in reserved,segregated bus lanes, and Metrobusesmake only limited stops.

STCUQ features the largest singletransit depot of its kind in NorthAmerica. The depot includes busstorage and maintenance facilities forthe entire fleet as well as administrationand management offices. Quebec Cityhas many transit priority measures inplace, including reserved lanes andintersection signal priority for STCUQbuses.


The structure of STCUQ is similarto that of many regional transitauthorities in the United States. Thevarious municipalities within theservice area are represented, and aportion of property tax revenues arededicated to transit.

Although provincial policydecisions have an important bearing onlocal transit service, STCUQ staffindicate that the province has littleinfluence on projects and does notattach requirements to funding. But thefact that funding is discretionary ratherthan formula based indicates thatSTCUQ has a significant influence on

21

project selection and design. Thesubstantial capital support for thereserved bus lanes and bus procurementdebt service signifies a provincialinterest in the accomplishment ofcertain local and regional objectives.

In addition to funding reservedbus lanes, granting approval toestablish and promote these lanes is animportant step taken by the province.Removing existing lanes from generaluse for restricted HOV or bus use isextremely difficult in the United States;this is sometimes difficult even whennew traffic lanes are being constructed.The STCUQ concept behind thesuccessful campaign to reserve theselanes was that one-third of the trafficwas being moved by buses; therefore,one-third of road capacity should bededicated to buses.

Keys to the success of the Quebecsystem appear to be the ancillarymechanisms established to enhancetransit services. In the case of reservedtraffic lanes, the implementation oftransit priority signalization provides aclear and distinct advantage for transitover general traffic. Further, theprovince requires that general trafficyield to buses exiting pull-out bays.Many U.S. transit systems are hesitantto build or use pull-out bays because ofthe difficulty operators can have inreentering the traffic flow.

The STCUQ vision of its corepurpose is evident in how it deals withfinancial cuts. Services that retain thehighest priority for funding are thosethat focus on high ridership, a highrevenue-cost ratio, and peak-hourwork-trip services, thus resulting inhigher levels of financial efficiency forthe system.

The restructuring of service inQuebec reflects selective applicationsof priority corridor treatments and buspriority technology to buildhighfrequency transit routes,resembling those on a light rail line.Transit priority (diamond lanes) wereimplemented primarily through takingan existing traffic lane. To minimize

dissension, the lanes were createdduring a holiday period so that trafficwould not be severely affectedimmediately.

Quebec implemented limited useof transit signal preemption.Preemption is provided only at a fewstrategic intersections where busesmust move from a curb lane to a left-turn lane; a separate signal phase isprovided for the bus to permit the turn.At transit centers, entrances are gated.The entrances open after buses aredetected through a height-readingdetector near the gate.

Although all systems visited inCanada offer extensive conventionalfixed-route bus services, a number ofthem provide innovative transit servicesthat address the needs of the lowerdensity markets in their service areas.STCUQ operates a Taxibus operationalong several routes on the periphery ofits service area. This service is operatedunder contract by private operators,which run reservation-based fixedroutes with taxicabs. These routesextend further into low-density areasand feed to the terminus stops of theregularly scheduled conventionalfixedroute bus operations.

STCUQ is working with smallstores, shopping centers, and churchesto establish small park-and-ride lotsthroughout its service area. The agencyenters into a cooperative agreementwith property owners to allow parkingfor transit users at no cost to the transitagency. About 45 park-and-ride lotshave been established. In general, thecooperating business owners andchurches see the benefit of bringingpotential customers and churchgoers,respectively, to their parking lots. Thetransit agency benefits by providing ameans for potential riders to access thetransit system. This is particularlyimportant in some of the outlying areaswhere local circulator routes have beeneliminated in favor of more frequentexpress buses on major corridors usingreserved bus lanes (the Metrobussystem).

MONTREAL

Transit Profile

Sometimes called the "Paris of theNew World," Montreal is acosmopolitan city with just over 1million inhabitants in the city properand 3 million in the region. It is thesecond largest metropolitan area inCanada, one of the world's largestinland seaports, a leading financial andmanufacturing center, and one ofCanada's oldest cities.

The Montreal metropolitan regionis served by three independent carrierscoordinated by a new regional agency,the Agence metropolitaine de transport(AMT). The Societe de transport de lacommunaute urbaine de Montreal(STCUM) is the largest of the threecarriers. The two others are the Societede transport de la Rive-sud de Montreal(STRSM), serving the South Shore, andthe Societe de transport de la Ville deLaval (STL), which serves the city ofLaval, just north of Montreal.

STCUM operates 1,626 buses and759 Metrorail (subway) cars, serving apopulation of 1.8 million. In 1994, thesystem carried almost 340 millionpassengers. Features include theMetrorail, patterned after the Metro inParis, and a number of prioritymeasures for buses, including the "RBus" routes that use either reserved orcounterflow (or contraflow) lanes (seeFigure 8). STCUM is the first Canadianoperator whose fleet consists entirely oflow-floor buses.

STRSM operates 335 buses alongthe urbanized South Shore of the St.Lawrence River. The service areaincludes 346,500 people. In 1995, thesystem carried more than 26 millionpassengers. Highlights include a majordowntown Montreal commuterterminal and the use of Europeanarticulated buses.

STL operates 220 buses in an areacentered around the city of Laval. Thesystem serves about 330,000 peopleand carried 16.3 million passengers in1994.

22

Its major transfer terminal is located atthe Henri Bourassa Metro station on theextreme north of Montreal.

Commuter rail links in the regionare coordinated by ATM and operatedby CN Rail and CP Rail on acontractual basis. The Deux-Montagneselectric service, which operates fromthe Central Station, has been fullyrebuilt and equipped with newBombardier rolling stock.


STCUM operates a full array ofbus services throughout its service areaand Metrorail service in the moredensely developed areas. The twoprincipal suburban transit operators,STRSM and STL, maintain extensivesuburban bus systems. These operatorscoordinate their activities with STCUMby operating major commuter transferterminals in Montreal.

STCUM's focus is on retainingexisting ridership levels. With limitedrevenue, little population growth, andincreasing suburban sprawl, the agencyis using innovation, serviceefficiencies, and customer service tomaintain its levels of service andridership. Surveys conducted by theagency indicate that there is 12 percentloss of existing riders and acorresponding 12 percent gain of newriders each year.

In Montreal, transit is of greatvalue to the public. STCUM is veryaware of the public's perception and asa whole is moving forward. Theyespecially took great care of theirsubway cars and stations. Montrealexhibits a true passion for customerservice. It has changed from aprojectoriented to a customer-orientedagency. One creative approach togetting close to the customer is anautomated survey of people who havecalled STCUM for information.STCUM receives 700 to 880 inquiriesdaily.

STCUM further focuses oncustomers by making listening a highpriority management skill. Listening tocustomer complaints and ensuringappropriate staff response has beenemphasized through creation of an

internal committee that reviews allcomplaints and responses.

One service that could have greatapplication in U.S. suburban transitsystems is Montreal's Between TwoStops Program. After 9:00 p.m.,passengers concerned about safety canrequest to be let off anywhere along theregular route instead of at designatedstops only.

Another element of this customerservice orientation is the newmoneyback guarantee policy proposedfor implementation in the fall of 1997.The policy states, "We will be on time,guaranteed. If we are late, you don'tpay." Other examples of innovationsand efficiencies include the designationof exclusive bus lanes, which results ina quality service advantage as well asoperational cost savings. STCUMrecently renegotiated labor contracts,resulting in no salary increases for 2years. It appears that both managementand labor recognize the gravity of thecurrent funding situation.

STCUM has been most aggressivein the area of public-privatepartnerships to raise revenue. STCUMis trying to significantly expand theportion of its budget generated byrental income and advertising. Besidesthe usual bus wraps, bus and trainadvertising panels, and subway stationadvertisements, STCUM has used hubcap ads, bus handstraps shaped like softdrink bottles, and even wrappedsubway trains. Two ad campaigns usingentire trains have been created to date,each generating more than $1.5 millionper year for the transit agency.

STCUM is exploring thefeasibility of commercializing entiresubway stations. Transit officials havebeen meeting with representatives ofthe top 25 companies in Montreal todetermine the level of interest in theconcept. Subway train wraps areconsidered a communication devicethat signals the coming of the stationcommercialization program. Theconcept would be to turn an entirestation over to a company, which couldthen paint the entire station in itscompany colors and logo, add stores,demonstrate new products, and

distribute information. A demographicprofile of the users of each subwaystation has been developed for thisprogram. With 65 stations and morethan 700,000 daily subway riders,STCUM has received substantialinterest in this program and hopes tofind a commercial partner for each ofits stations, the largest of which servemore than 1 million users each month.

OTTAWA

Transit Profile

Ottawa, Canada's capital, ranksfourth among the metropolitan areas inthe country with a population of morethan 900,000. The city itself has about340,000 inhabitants.

There are two major transitsystems in the national capital region.The Ottawa-Carleton Regional TransitCommission, operating as OC Transpo,is the larger of the two, with 820 busesserving a population of 626,000. OCTranspo is the public transit operatingarm of the regional municipalityresponsible for planning and operatingtransit services throughout the region.

The second system is the Societede transport de l'Outaouais (STO),which serves the Quebec portion of theregion. STO operates 186 buses,serving seven municipalities and228,500 people. Its commuter linesreach downtown Ottawa.

The OC Transpo fleet moves morepassengers to their destinations thanany other comparable system in NorthAmerica. In 1994, ridership totaled73.4 million. The system is best knownfor its exclusive and extensiveTransitway (or Busway)--a network ofbus-only arterials that provide frequentand rapid service. During peak hours,200 buses carry 10,000 passengersalong the Transitway in each direction(see Figure 9). This is a considerablylarger number of commuters than thenumber who use the Queensway, theregion's major freeway, to get to theirdestinations. OC Transpo's concern forthe environment has been demonstratedby green-space improvements

23

along all sections of the Transitway. Anextensive tree and shrub plantingprogram is underway. Previouseyesores, such as abandoned railwaylines and trash dumps, have beentransformed into linear parks.

Transecure, an innovativeneighborhood watch program onwheels operated by OC Transpodrivers, summons emergency help forpeople in trouble or calls the policewhen suspicious or illegal activities areobserved along their routes. Launchedin 1989, Transecure is successful inassisting people in obvious distress,summoning medical help, stoppingburglars in the act, and allowing peopleto use buses as shelters and safe havensuntil help arrives on the scene. Driversare instructed to allow passengers toalight between regular stops after 9:00p.m. if this brings them closer to theirdestinations and they feel nervousabout their safety.

With its 148 articulated buses, OCTranspo has become Canada's largestuser of articulated buses. OC Transpoalso operates a number ofcommunityoriented bus routes in thecity's urban neighborhoods. Thefarebox coverage of the system was 58percent in 1994 and the total number offull-time personnel was 2,143, all but159 of whom were drivers andmechanics.


The growth and development ofOttawa demonstrate a strongcommitment by the community toquality-of-life issues. Examples includeprotecting the expansive green way,preserving historic structures, andoperating an annual municipal programto maintain the Rideau River as theworld's longest skating rink.

Another example of thiscommitment is the official "transitfirst"policy regarding Ottawa'stransportation planning. Manyresources available for transportationpurposes are invested in publictransportation, even though highwaycongestion does not appear to be a

significant issue. Even during peakhours in downtown areas of Ottawa,long traffic delays are rare.

By observing Ottawa, U.S. citiescan learn that there are several commonfallacies in the transportation industry.One is that a large population,incredibly high densities, and atransitcaptive workforce are needed togenerate significant transit usage. Thepopulation of the Ottawa metropolitanarea is only 900,000, and the downtownworkforce numbers 280,000.Approximately 88,000 of these workersare employed by the federalgovernment; these workers arenormally associated with white-collar,"choice" ridership. Parking downtownis $7 per day, and traffic congestion isnot severe. Yet the system carries 74million passengers yearly. Anotherfallacy is that severe congestion andheavy fare subsidies are needed toinfluence modal choice. The one-wayfare on OC Transpo is $1.85 ($2.90 forexpress service), with monthly passescosting $72.50 (including expressservice); therefore, clearly there are nohuge fare subsidies.

Another frequently citedimpediment to transit usage is the needfor trip chaining. Trips are rarelyexclusively to work and back home.More often, they involve trips to shopsand other services. The Transitwayaddresses these trip-chainingrequirements in several ways. First,stations along the facility are wellintegrated with existing and newdevelopment, including several majorshopping centers. Second, frequenciesare such that passengers can get off thebus at a station and then catch anotherbus without incurring substantial delay.Approximately 70 percent ofpassengers on the system use monthlypasses, allowing them to get off and onthe system without having to payadditional fares.

Finally, many in the United Statesbelieve that choice riders will chooserail but will avoid buses at all cost. OCTranspo demonstrates that it is notnecessarily the technology that attractsriders, it is whether the system worksfor the customer. People will use the

system if it is convenient, affordable,and makes more sense than driving.

There is a strong regional focus inOttawa. When the regionalmunicipality was created, functionscommon to all member municipalitieswere transferred from local to regionalcontrol. These functions includeplanning, debt financing, sewagetreatment, traffic control, publictransportation, and social services. Thisconsolidation provides greatercoordination of public services.Another factor that aids Ottawa in itsregional approach is that the transitcommission is elected from theregional council, not directly from themunicipalities.

The Communibus program isexample of partnership at thecommunity level. In response tofunding reductions, OC Transpoevaluated routes in its service area andidentified several poor-performingroutes for elimination to help balancethe budget. For some routes, theCommunibus program provided anopportunity for a community to save itsroute. "Use it or lose it" type noticeswere placed in local newspapers tonotify the community that the route wasin jeopardy. A time limit was given forthe route to be brought up to acceptableperformance standards. In severalinstances, the community organizedsupport though coordinated efforts oflocal merchants, service organizations,and community leaders, which boostedridership.

OC Transpo's regional focus alsois evident in its Transecure program,which has a number ofcommunityoriented features.Employees serve this community watchprogram on wheels by using two-wayradios in vehicles to summon help andto provide information on emergenciesand other incidents. As mentionedpreviously, the program offers transitvehicles as a safe haven for people indistress. Similar to the Between TwoStops Program in Montreal, theTransecure Night Stop service allowspassengers traveling after 9:00 p.m. tobe let off at a location closer to theirdestination instead of at a regular stop.

24

TORONTO

Transit Profile

Toronto, the capital of theprovince of Ontario, is the mostpopulated metropolitan area in Canada,with a population of 1 million.

The ridership of the TorontoTransit Commission (TTC), which isoperated by the metropolitangovernment, is second only to NewYork City in North America. Thisresults in part from the residentialdensity of the city proper, which isnearly 20,000 persons per square mile.Highways and commuter trains andbuses augment the transit system.Although Toronto's streets arecongested with traffic, the city hasresisted building major expressways.More than a dozen transit systems servethe Greater Toronto Area. The largestof these is operated by TTC, whichprovides service in the Torontometropolitan area (about 400 sq mi),serving 2.3 million people. The systemoperates 1,539 buses (including 90artics), 295 light rail vehicles, and 622subway cars. In 1994, the system,known for its high degree of integrationbetween rapid transit and surfaceroutes, carried more than 388 millionriders. Much urban development hastaken place around many of the subwaystations.

The Scarborough suburban railline, also operated by TTC, uses linearinduction technology (the same that isused by the SkyTrain in Vancouver).TTC is building a new surface light railline, which is partially in operationalong the waterfront.

The other major regionaltransportation provider, Government ofOntario Transit (GO Transit) isoperated by an agency of the provincialgovernment. GO Transit serves an areaof 3,000 sq mi and sets the currentNorth American standard for commuterrail with its fleet of 331 bilevelpassenger cars and 49 locomotives. Thesystem runs 139 trains and provides1,000 bus trips daily, carrying 120,000passengers on an average weekday (seeFigure 10). The

bus component includes 184 buses onsuburban feeder routes, transporting29,000 passengers daily. In 1994, GOTransit's ridership totaled 34.5 million.


Toronto is a textbook example ofcoordinating land use policies withtransit system development. At theregional level, the Municipality ofMetropolitan Toronto (Metro) hasprovided a long-range plan for greaterToronto, with a strong emphasis onintegrating transit and land use. Theplan focused on developing compactcorridors along Toronto's subwaysystem, with high-density office,commercial, and residentialdevelopment directed around subwaystations. As growth continued,development was channeled intocorridors extending along streetsperpendicular to the subway lines andserved by surface streetcar lines orhighlevel bus services.

In addition to the compact corridordevelopment strategy, two other landuse planning approaches have beensuccessfully used in Toronto. One isthe development of urban centers, aconcept also being implemented inVancouver and Calgary. This approachis designed to promote better balancebetween the location of employmentand residential areas and to encouragereverse commuting by focusing newdevelopment into "mini-downtown" or"satellite downtown" areas-to balancepeak demands on the transit and roadsystems.

The other approach is thedevelopment of the underground Pathsystem. During the past 25 years, anetwork of 21 km (nearly 13 mi) oftunnels and bridges has been developedto connect downtown subway stationsto adjacent shopping centers and officebuildings. The concept, which wasincorporated into the area's land useplans in the late 1960s, has beenincrementally developed primarilythough private-sector initiatives.

GO Transit is a significant moverof people. Canadian officials haveinvested substantial financial resourcesin the country's commuter rail. Theyhave also opted not to build freewayswhere commuter rail lines operate. Thisfact is probably the single mostimportant lesson learned. Transitauthorities in Canada have a real voicein what is built in their jurisdictions.Metropolitan planning decisions toimplement commuter rail have savedthe cost of building more than fivefreeway facilities.

GO Transit is not considered ascommuter rail but as transportation forcommuters. Service delivery affordsother opportunities for creativity. Forinstance, during periods of lightdemand, GO Transit stops train servicebut operates buses along its commuterrail alignment. This brings costs in linewith ridership without eliminatingservice. In addition, local buses whichpulse at the GO Transit commuter railstation, operate flexible routes ratherthan fixed routes. In the evening, whendemand lessens, the service area inOakville (a suburb of Toronto with acommuter rail stop) is divided into fourquadrants, with one bus operatingwithin each quadrant. Still later in theevening, Oakville bus service quadrantsare consolidated into two zones. Thisreduces the total expense of operation,while providing customers total areacoverage that is more like a door-to-door cab service.

The TTC provides a designatedwaiting area on all subway platforms toensure customer safety and security.These areas have brighter lights, anintercom, a closed-circuit televisioncamera, and a public telephone.

CALGARY

Transit Profile

Calgary, with a population of738,000, is the largest city in theprovince of Alberta. Transit is providedby a city-run system whose ridership in1994 was 52.6 million. Calgary Transitoperates 550 vehicles, 51 of which are

25

articulated and 85 of which are lightrail.

The system is known for its "CTrain" light rail service, which operateson two lines and serves the central,northwestern, northeastern, andsouthern parts of the city. The C Trainoperates on transit-only streets in thecentral city and on reserved rights-ofway outside the core area. Altogetherthere are five light rail transit (LRT)lines in the city, with a total length of18.2 mi and which are boarded on aweekday average (1995) by 112,700passengers. More than 90 of thesystem's buses are of low-floor design.By percentage, this represents one ofthe largest fleets of low-floor buses inthe country. Employees total 1,585, 113of whom are employed in managementand administration. Farebox coveragein 1994 was 51 percent.


Using Calgary as an example,newly developing urban areas, similarto those in the Sunbelt and westernUnited States, can grow in a mannerthat is conducive to high levels oftransit use and service. Investment inthe transportation infrastructure inCalgary is the result of a great deal ofpublic outreach and involvement, andthe investment decisions reflectcommunity priorities. Both highwayand transit systems are planned tocomplement each other, whereappropriate, and to satisfy existing orplanned growth as dictated by theadopted land use plans.

Transit accommodation exists inthe form of an extensive network offacilities: a light rail line, extensivepark-and-ride lot system, majorhighfrequency transit corridors, bus-only lanes, major cross-town high-frequency bus routes, and expressservice to employment areas.

Services are provided where theyare most in demand. Transit is viewednot as a social service, but as anintegral component of thetransportation system. Many U.S. citiesin high-growth

areas might find Calgary's modelrelevant to examine.

Calgary provides the mostimpressive examples of progressiveurban policy development. It hascreated a new government corporationthat is responsible for administering abroad range of public services,including water, sewer, transit, andplanning. With declining resources forroads and other public services, there isa greater focus on moving people andgoods in a coordinated manner. Toensure that the corporation makes goodinvestments, an annual census is taken,and every 3 to 5 years, acomprehensive origin/destination studyis completed. Information from thecensus and the study helps the planningstaff make proper projections, therebyaiding in the final decisions affectingdelivery of public services.

Calgary's "Go" plan is animpressive example of a partnershipbetween citizens, staff, and electedofficials. The plan grew out of theconcerns expressed by citizens in 1991about what Calgary would look like asa result of its growth. These concernsprompted the city council to reconsiderits existing transportation plan. Theissues of community and environmentalquality, along with mobility and costs,guided the overall approach indesigning the new transportation plan.These four concerns surfaced as a resultof significant discussion and broad-based public input. The vision of howCalgary will look in 30 years achievedwide acceptance as citizens becamemore involved and informed. TheCalgary planning model is an excellentexample of creating public ownershipin the process, vision, and outcome.

Financial restrictions led to thedevelopment of business-basedplanning approaches for introducingand assessing bus routes. Both Ottawaand Calgary make service decisionsbased on the potential ridership benefitsper unit of service cost. This clearlyreflects an underlying value: Servemore people for less money.

Calgary also responded with aunique approach to funding paratransit

door-to-door service, which is moreexpensive per passenger trip thanfixedroute transit. Calgary obtainsprivate donations for the purchase ofthe paratransit fleet. Individual vehiclesare marked to honor people who makedonations. One staff position isdedicated to obtaining private funding,which in turn frees up more dollars forservice delivery.

Calgary has also developed apartnership with local providers ofschool bus service. Calgary Transitschedules school bus service andprovides field supervision. The schoolsystem continues to purchase, operate,and maintain vehicles, but has beenable to eliminate supervisory staff. Thepublic benefits through thisarrangement, which eliminatesduplicated functions between twopublicly financed institutions.

VANCOUVER

Transit Profile

Located just north of theU.S.Canada border, Vancouver is theindustrial, commercial, and financialcenter of British Columbia. GreaterVancouver is Canada's third largestmetropolitan area, after Toronto andMontreal. Vancouver is 140 mi north ofSeattle, Washington. Extending over anarea of 44 sq mi, metropolitanVancouver, with more than 1.6 millionpeople, contains almost half of BritishColumbia's population; the city properhas a little over 470,000 inhabitants.

The city is characterized by astrong downtown, surrounded byhighdensity neighborhoods, whichencourage walking and high transitusage. Although suburban areas have alower density, many regionalsubcenters have begun to develop as aresult of regional planning and rapidtransit investment. The city itselfremains one of the few in NorthAmerica without a freeway.

Vancouver is one of the fastestgrowing metropolitan regions in NorthAmerica, with a net annual populationgain of more than 40,000.

BC Transit is a Crown (public)corporation of the province of British

26

Columbia. Its 17-member board ofdirectors, appointed by the responsibleminister, is made up of elected andappointed officials from thecommunities served by the system. Theboard is responsible for transit policymaking and coordination, including theplanning and funding of transit systemsin the province. All transit assets,including fleet, facilities, andguideways, are owned by thecorporation.

The chair of BC Transit isappointed by the provincial cabinet.The day-to-day business of thecorporation is conducted by a presidentand chief executive officer, assisted bysix corporate support units: finance,technical services, corporate services,security, human resources, and strategicplanning. Customer services aredelivered through four business units:Vancouver Bus, BC Rapid TransitCompany (BCRT), West Coast Express(WCE), and Victoria/MunicipalSystems (VMS).

Transit oversight services inBritish Columbia are provided inpartnership with local governments andregional transit commissions. In theVancouver region, a commissionrepresents the 17 municipalities, theelectoral districts, and three villagesconstituting the Vancouver RegionalTransit System (VRTS). Commissionmembers are the local mayors, citycouncilors, and electoral districtrepresentatives, some of whom also siton the board of directors.Representation is geographically based,with one commissioner representing aspecific group of municipalities.

Under the province's BC TransitAct, regional transit commissions areresponsible for the following:

• Determining routes, service levels,and performance standards;• Reviewing and recommendingannual operating and capital budgets tothe BC Transit board; and• Raising the local share of thetransit deficit through local taxation.

VRTS serves a population of 1.7million with an integrated network ofservices including diesel, CNG and

electric trolley buses, passenger ferries(SeaBus), automated light rail transit(SkyTrain), and commuter rail (WestCoast Express) (see Figure 11).Covering an area of 1,125 sq mi, VRTSrepresents the largest urban transitservice area in Canada. With more than115 million revenue passengers peryear (215 million unlinked trips),VRTS ranks third in overall ridership,after Toronto and Montreal. Although adownturn was experienced during therecession in the mid-1980s, systemgrowth has been very strong during thepast 5 years. Since 1987, transit servicehas expanded by 37 percent, ridershipby 28 percent, and the fleet by 74percent.

The main components of thesystem are urban buses and trolleybuses, SeaBus, SkyTrain, and the WestCoast Express.

Urban Buses and Trolley Buses

The fleet consists of 675 dieseland 25 CNG buses, plus 244 electrictrolley buses, for a total of 944vehicles. Buses come in a variety ofsizes. All bus services in themetropolitan region are operated by BCTransit, except for in West Vancouver,where the municipal authorities run busservices under contract to BC Transit.Wheelchair lifts and low floors are usedthroughout.

SeaBus

This service consists of twodouble-ended catamaran ferries with acapacity of 400 passengers each.Opened in 1977, SeaBus travels 1.75nautical miles across Burrard Inletbetween downtown Vancouver andLonsdale Quay in North Vancouver.The Burrard Beaver and the BurrardOtter depart every 15 min and carryabout 11,000 passengers daily. SeaBusis operated by Vancouver Bus.

SkyTrain

A completely automated,driverless system, SkyTrain connects

downtown Vancouver with suburbanNew Westminster and Surrey, serving20 stations along its 28-km (17.4-mi)route (see Figure 12). Opened 10 yearsago, SkyTrain uses state-of-the-artlinear induction and moving blocktechnology. Most of the route iselevated, but in downtown Vancouver,the line operates underground. Officeand commercial developments builtwithin walking distance of SkyTrainstations are currently valued at morethan C $5 billion (approximately $3.8billion). The line now carriesapproximately 115,000 passengers eachworkday, and passenger totals havemore than doubled since the line firstopened. SkyTrain is operated byBCRT, the wholly owned BC Transitsubsidiary.

West Coast Express

A new 40-mi commuter lineconnecting some of the eastern suburbswith downtown Vancouver, West CoastExpress (WCE) commenced service inNovember 1995 and operates bilevelcars similar to those used by GOTransit in Toronto (see Figure 13). Theservice also features "cappuccino cars"for its commuter clientele. Currently itconsists of five trains westbound in themorning and five eastbound duringevening rush hours. The WCE fleetconsists of 5 locomotives and 28bilevel cars; ridership is increasing andnow stands at 5,500 per day.


Though geographically separatedby the Strait of Georgia, both the citiesof Vancouver and Victoria providetransit services through BC Transit.

BC Transit operates a full array oftransit services throughout its servicearea, including conventional fixed-route bus, trolley bus on heavier fixedroutes, the SkyTrain system, the uniqueSeaBus, and the WCE commuter railservice. BC Transit is planning toexpand its family of services in thelower density and suburban sections ofits service area. Minibus-based

27

operation of regional center circulators,community-oriented feeder services,and suburban demand-responsive basicmobility services as well as shared-ridetaxi services are actively being devised.

A key to Vancouver's success inplanning for and implementing itsextensive network of transit facilitiesand services is its general policy ofconstrained roadway building. No newexpressways or freeways are beingbuilt; in fact, none exist in themetropolitan area. There is emphasis onthe use of public transportation as themeans to serve intraurban mobilityneeds and to accomplish land use andcity-shaping objectives. The funding oftransit projects, therefore, is not seen asa diversion from traditional highwayfunding sources, but simply the resultof a conscious decision on the part ofthe community to address mobilityneeds.

Following are some outstandingfeatures of transit service inVancouver:

• Coordination among varioustransit modes, which is evident throughnearly seamless transfer connections;• Strong linkage between land useplanning and development; and• SkyTrain, which is viewed as atool to shape urban growth.

VICTORIA

Transit Profile

One of the oldest communities inthe province of British Columbia andthe provincial capital, Victoria has apopulation of 72,000 and ametropolitan area population estimatedat 317,000.

Victoria/Municipal Systems(VMS), an integral component of BCTransit, currently operates a fleet of190 buses in Victoria and carries 17million passengers annually. Theparatransit system has 31 vehicles thatcarry 190,000 passengers annually.Accessible conventional transit servicewas introduced 5 years ago using low-floor buses that offer easier boardingfor all passengers and full accessibilityfor

people in wheelchairs. The systemprovides attractive levels of service onmajor corridors, focusing ondowntown. In the important commutermarket, the percentage of transit todowntown approaches 15 percent of alltravel on a 24-hr basis. A recent surveyrevealed that more than 60 percent ofthe region's residents boarded a transitbus in the past year.

By concentrating recent expansionin the peak hours, the transit system isdeveloping a strong regional commuterfocus, with 15-min frequencies duringpeak hours from the outer reaches ofthe transit service area about 20 mifrom the central business district todowntown. Total operating revenuecovers roughly 50 percent of the totaldirect operating expense; municipal andprovincial subsidies cover the balance.During the past decade, Victoria'stransit system has consistentlymaintained one of the lowest accidentrates in North America, for which it hasreceived numerous awards. VMS has atotal workforce of 480 employees, 67of whom are employed in managementand administration.

On-Street Management System

A notable, recent VMS innovationhas been its on-street managementsystem, which eliminates centralcontrol and combines new radio andcomputer technology with a simplifiedorganizational structure. The systemenhances service reliability, improvessafety, and decreases costs. Direct radiolinks with police, fire, and ambulanceservices also provide spin-off benefitsto the community.

Victoria's on-street managementprogram allows the transit service to bemanaged from the road supervisor'svans, eliminating the need for centralcontrol and saving C $328,000($252,000).


Like many of the other citiesstudied, Victoria's transit system ischaracterized by a strong customer

focus. Its marketing focus has been onspecific age groups, where thenetwork's increase in ridership hasbeen.

Strong concern for theenvironment is evidenced by theVictoria region's Task Group onAtmospheric Change, whichencourages increased public transit, andthe provincial Greenhouse Gas ActionPlan, which recommends reducingvehicle trips through mass transit,carpooling, and other measures.

Victoria's Busline project is aprototype, computerized telephoneinformation system. The systemprovides customers with the followinginformation: (1) bus departure timesand when the next bus will arrive; (2)instructions on how to get the bus; (3)general transit information; and (4)connections to other modes. Before thisproject, about 29 operator hours wereavailable to answer 770 calls forinformation per day, with 36 percent ofthe callers experiencing busy signalsand 18 percent put on hold. The projectincreased calls to 940 and improvedservice, without adding additionaloperators. The project cost $590,860,and projected savings over 10 years isestimated at $1.5 million, for a netvalue of $447,000.

Transit service is an importantcomponent of the public service inVictoria, and the Victoria RegionalTransit System has obtained a strongcommitment to public transit with highlevels of service and use. Thesuccessful image of a high-quality, safeand dependable service played animportant role for entry into severalpartnerships. Partnerships have beenestablished with 45 municipalities toimprove the traffic flow.

The university has raised tuitioncost to help subsidize the student buspass program. This program benefitsthe community because it reducesheavy automobile traffic.

LESSONS LEARNED

Several conclusions can be drawnfrom the transit experiences inCanadian cities in terms of applying

28

successful transit service techniques toU.S. cities. But first, a caution isnecessary. In almost every caseexamined in this study, transit has beena major component of thetransportation system for a long time.

For example, the tremendousridership levels in Ottawa are not theresult of implementing the innovativeTransitway. These levels existed beforethe Transitway was developed. TheTransitway made transit service moreefficient and effective, but was notnecessary to induce people to choosetransit. Similarly, high transit ridershipin the larger cities of Montreal andToronto is a continuation oflongestablished patterns. Transit can beextremely successful and relevant. Butin the United States, it is likely thatpotential customers will first have to beconvinced to leave their cars at home.What makes transit in Canada such animportant and relied on component ofcity infrastructure? Unlike the UnitedStates, why is "transit first" commonpolicy in Canadian metropolitan areas?Rather than dismantle existing transitsystems in the early part of this century,Canadian cities chose to invest anddevelop them. At the same time, U.S.cities were heavily investing inhighway development.

As a result, existing transitsystems in the United Statesdeteriorated because of lack ofadequate public funding, whileCanadian transit continued to grow andplay a major role in urban developmentand sustainability. The view that thepublic will continue to rely on publictransportation in Canadian citiescontinues to affect land use planningand long-term development ofmetropolitan areas. As a result, transitis servicing existing developments, andnew developments are planned tosupport existing transit facilities.

Some might conclude that transitis popular in Canada simply because itis part of the culture and Canadians areused to using it. But what makes transiteffective, as demonstrated in every sitevisited during this mission study, istransit's competitiveness with othermodes of travel in terms of time. Inevery city, most peak-hour trips to thedowntown area are faster and lessexpensive than comparable trips byautomobile. Extremely high servicefrequencies during peak hours,combined with exclusive transitfacilities in each city, make transitmore appealing. Whether theseexclusive facilities are light rail,dedicated transit lanes on existinghighways, or exclusive transit ways,each operates independent of the flowof traffic.

Operating transit services is tricky,with many impediments to success.Although there are definite differencesin society, form of governance,provision of public services, laborrelations, and community outlookbetween Canada and the United States,a number of lessons learned from thisreview of Canadian transit experienceappear to be relevant for possible U.S.application.

• Being proactive rather thanreactive is important to transitdevelopment.• It is important to understand thecyclical nature of the transit businessand to view transit investments and thedevelopment that will follow in thelong term.• Numerous markets requirecustomized and innovative, notnecessarily large-scale, services.• Passengers are customers, andcustomers need a range of services andwell-presented information to ensurethat they remain consumers.• Transit systems should be keptsimple.• Transit operators have to gobeyond their usual role of operatingbuses and trains efficiently and mustbecome involved in infrastructureactivities to ensure that the operatingenvironment is transit-friendly.

29

Figure 8. Contraflow bus in Montreal.

Figure 9. Busway in Ottawa.

30

Figure 10. GO Transit bilevel commuter rail wrap in Toronto generates $10, 000 per carper month in revenue.

Figure 11. Sign in Vancouver at the intermodal Waterfront Station displaying directions to SkyTrain, West Coast Express commuter rail, and SeaBus.

31

Figure 12. The driverless SkyTrain in Vancouver is accessible to high-rise development.

Figure 13. Cappuccino car on West Coast Express commuter rail in Vancouver.

This page left intentionally blank.

33

APPENDIX A

MISSION PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR TITLES ANDAFFILIATIONS AT THE TIME OF THE MISSION

Mission 4--May 9-26, 1996: Urban and Regional Bus Operations in SmallerEuropean Cities (Zurich, Schaffhausen, and Frauenfeld, Switzerland;Dornbirn, Austria; Lindau, Radolfzell, Ravensburg,Detmold, Lemgo,Bad Salzuflen, and Muenster, Germany; Antwerp, Liege, and Brugge,Belgium; Breda, Dordrecht, Maastricht, and Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Participants

Mr. Dick Ruddell (Team Leader)General ManagerToledo Area Regional Transit AuthorityToledo, OH

Mr. Roosevelt BradleyAssistant Director for Bus Operations andMaintenanceMetro-Dade Transit AgencyMiami, FL

Ms. Rosie BroadusDirector of TransportationBaldwin Rural Area Transportation SystemRobertsdale, AL

Mr. Roger K. ChapinExecutive DirectorFoothill TransitWest Covina, CA

Mr. Van J. ChesnutExecutive DirectorAdvance Transit, Inc.Wilder, VT

Ms. Sarah deDoesChief Executive OfficerMetroPortland, ME

Mr. Paul A. HamiltonTransportation ManagerShoshone and Arapahoe Nations TransportationAuthorityEthete, WY

Ms. Gayle P. HollidayDeputy General ManagerKansas City Area Transportation AuthorityKansas City, MO

Mr. John A. KernTransit ManagerCapital TransitCity and Borough of JuneauJuneau, AK

Mr. Ryan J. LarsenTransit Service ManagerMadison Metro Transit SystemMadison, WI

Mr. Martin C. MinkoffGeneral ManagerWhatcom Transportation AuthorityBellingham, WA

Ms. Mary Jo MorandiniAssistant Executive DirectorBeaver County Transit AuthorityRochester, PA

Mr. Mark PritchardGeneral ManagerMetropolitan Tulsa Transit AuthorityTulsa, OK

Dr. Jack M. ReillyDirector of Planning and DevelopmentCapital District Transportation AuthorityAlbany, NY

Ms. Tracy Dunleavy (Project Manager)Programs DirectorEno Transportation FoundationLansdowne, VA

Coordinator

Dr. George G. WynneDirector, International CenterAcademy for State & Local GovernmentWashington, DC

34

Mission 5--October 14-27, 1996: Canadian Urban and RegionalTransit Innovations (Quebec, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary,Vancouver, and Victoria)

Participants

Mr. Bob Lingwood (Team Leader)General Manager, Victoria and the MunicipalSystemsBC TransitVictoria, British Columbia, Canada

Mr. Jeffrey C. ArndtAssistant General Manager, Transit OperationsMetropolitan Transit AuthorityHouston, TX

Mr. John W. ClausonService Development DirectorKitsap TransitBremerton, WA

Mr. Edward R.CovenManager, Transit OfficeFlorida Department of TransportationTallahassee, FL

Mr. Roger HenzeTransportation PlannerCobb County Department of TransportationMarietta, GA

Ms. Nancy HsuAssistant General Manager for Rail ServicesWashington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityWashington, DC

Mr. Robert KniefelPublic Transportation DirectorMunicipality of AnchoragePublic Transportation DepartmentAnchorage, AK

Mr. Joseph KottTransportation Planning ManagerGreater Portland Council of GovernmentsPortland, ME

Ms. Minietta E. NelsonDirector of OperationsGary Public Transportation Corp.Gary, IN

Mr. Charles Lee Pettus, Sr.President and Business AgentAmalgamated Transit UnionBaltimore, MD

Mr. John QuinnSystem Planner IIDallas Area Regional TransitDallas, TX

Mr. Craig H. ScottManager of Transportation FinanceSan Diego Association of GovernmentsSan Diego, CA

Mr. James H. SlakeyDirector, Public Transportation and Rail DivisionWashington State Department of TransportationOlympia, WA

Mr. Jeffery D. WebsterGeneral ManagerFresno County Rural Transit AgencyFresno, CA

Mr. Hannie L. Woodson, Jr.General SuperintendentMetro-Dade TransitMiami, FL

Project Manager

Ms. Tracy DunleavyPrograms DirectorEno Transportation FoundationLansdowne, VA

35

APPENDIX B

European Hosts Perspectives of "What They Do Best"

INTERNATIONAL TRANSIT STUDIES PROGRAM

Documents