Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 32-44
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 32... ...
32 This section presents three case studies that provide more in-depth information on specific aspects of private transit operations and regulation: • Case Study I examines the Bay Area "Tech Bus" shuttle census and SFMTA commuter shuttle program, which together provide an example of a proactive and cooperative model for arriving at a regulatory structure, despite public authorities' lack of statutory power. • Case Study II examines consortium-based shuttles and the variety of public-private partnerships that have been developed to support commuter access to suburban job centers, areas that would have difficulty supporting fixed-route public transit.
|
From page 33... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 33 transportation routes, local TDM requirements gave the companies an additional incentive to provide shuttle buses as an amenity for their employees. By 2012, the growing presence of large motor coaches, especially in gentrifying San Francisco neighborhoods such as the Mission District, along with the buses' unsanctioned use of Muni bus stops for pick-ups and drop-offs, began attracting negative attention from residents and the media (Carroll 2013, McBride 2013)
|
From page 34... ...
34 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions SFMTA did not dictate routes, but the larger shuttles were not permitted to travel down certain streets. The agency, in turn, designated approximately 100 Muni stops ("red zones")
|
From page 35... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 35 • Stop events. Participating shuttles made an estimated 2,302 daily stop events in June 2014 in the study area, before the launch of the program.
|
From page 36... ...
36 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions The latter provision, which required companies to outline plans for preventing and dealing with potential service disruptions, including labor disputes, was drafted in response to the International Brotherhood of Teamsters' organizing of drivers for the major shuttle providers and to possible disruptions due to resistance by some employers (SF Board of Supervisors Resolution 96-15, 2015)
|
From page 37... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 37 Case Study II: Consortium-Sponsored Services: Public-Private Partnerships to Access Low-Density Areas The service model that this report has termed "consortium-sponsored services" is neither wholly sponsored by a single entity like the large employer shuttle networks, nor is it purely commercial. Instead, the consortium-sponsored shuttles examined here are the product of public-private partnerships that usually provide last-mile service in lower density areas.
|
From page 38... ...
38 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions SMCTA, C/CAG, and Measure A funds. Measure A is a sales county tax measure that was approved by voters in 1988 and renewed for 2009 through 2033.
|
From page 39... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 39 and Lake-Cook Road in Chicago's northwestern suburbs. The Shuttle Bug program was initiated in 1996 and is a public-private partnership of the TMA, Metra commuter rail, Pace Suburban Bus, and several corporate partners.
|
From page 40... ...
40 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions its service period (weekdays, 6am to 7pm)
|
From page 41... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 41 options. Consortium-sponsored services are often closely coordinated with public entities, such as municipalities or TDM groups, with public monies helping to underwrite the transportation provided.
|
From page 42... ...
42 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions basis (i.e., without accepting street hails) (Goldwyn 2017, 48; NYC Code §19-502 and §19-529.1)
|
From page 43... ...
Case Studies: Local Approaches to Transportation Challenges 43 accept direct compensation from the passenger, they are subject to full Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. As shown in Table 5, the primary concern of the regulation is vehicle safety, and the chief difference between the two categories is the level of liability insurance required (NJTPA 2011, 53–59)
|
From page 44... ...
44 Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions Regardless of these regulations, representatives of Hudson County are still working to create greater oversight (Mota 2016)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.