TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

E-CIRCULARNumber E-C033 July 2001

This Is Light Rail Transit

Presented at the8th Joint Conference on

Light Rail TransitNovember 2000

Dallas, Texas

TRANSPORTATION NUMBER E-C033, July 2001RESEARCH ISSN 0097-8515 E-CIRCULAR

This Is Light Rail TransitPresented at the

8th Joint Conference on Light Rail TransitNovember 12–15, 2000

Dallas, Texas

Cosponsored byAmerican Public Transportation Association

Transportation Research Board

Light Rail Conference Planning Committee

Anthony J. Schill, Chair, Conference Planning CommitteeImmediate Past Chair, APTA Light Rail Transit Technical Forum

General Manager, Niagara Frontier Transit Metro System, Inc., Buffalo, N.Y.Thomas Larwin, Cochair, Conference Planning CommitteeImmediate Past Chair, TRB Light Rail Transit Committee

General Manager, San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development BoardDouglas Allen, Dallas Area Rapid Transit

Susan S. Bauman, Dallas Area Rapid TransitGregory Benz, Parsons Brinckerhoff

Thomas Carmichael, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityJohn D. Claflin, Denver Regional Transportation District

Thomas R. Hickey, Delaware River Port Authority Transit CorporationJohn Inglish, Utah Transit Authority

Rodney W. Kelly, Parsons Transportation GroupMichael Magdziak, New Jersey Transit CorporationLinda J. Meadow, Linda J. Meadow and Associates

Jeffrey Mora, Federal Transit AdministrationPaul O’Brien, Utah Transit Authority

Thomas Parkinson, Transport Consulting, Ltd.S. David Phraner, Edwards and Kelcey, Inc.

John W. Schumann, LTK Engineering ServicesJoseph S. Silien, PB Transit and Rail Systems, Inc.

Gregory L. Thompson, Florida State UniversityJohn D. Wilkins, New Jersey Transit Corporation

Richard P. Wolsfeld, BRW, Inc.David R. Phelps, American Public Transportation Association

Peter L. Shaw, Transportation Research Board

TRB website: www.TRB.org

Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20418

The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National Research Council, a private, nonprofit institution that is the principal operating agency of theNational Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. Under a congressional charter granted to the National Academy of Sciences, theNational Research Council provides scientific and technical advice to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities.

The Transportation Research Board is distributing this Circular to make the information contained herein available for use by individual practitioners instate and local transportation agencies, researchers in academic institutions, and other members of the transportation research community. The informationin this Circular was taken directly from the submissions of the authors. This document is not a report of the National Research Council or of the NationalAcademy of Sciences.

This Is Light Rail Transit was prepared by the Light Rail TransitCommittee of the Transportation Research Board; Jack W.Boorse acted as principal author, and E. L. Tennyson and JohnW. Schumann provided statistical research and analysis. Thisbooklet was first distributed at the Eighth National Conferenceon Light Rail Transit in Dallas, Texas, in November 2000 on theconference proceedings CD-ROM. The conference wassponsored jointly by the Transportation Research Board and theAmerican Public Transportation Association.

Published by the Transportation Research Board, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20418, November 2000.

Photo courtesy of Dallas AreaRapid Transit Authority

Inset: America’s newest LightRail Transit system servesdowntown Jersey City across theHudson River from LowerManhattan.

Photo courtesy of Jack W. Boorse

2

As its surnameindicates, Light RailTransit (LRT) is a

transit mode. Its middle namereflects that fact that it runs onrails. Why is it called “light”?That depends on who andwhere you ask.

An aerial LRTstructure inBaltimore.

Photo courtesy of Parsons Brinckerhoff

In Britain the term “lightrailway” is applied to any railmode that is scaled down fromthe common size of mainlinerailroads. In previous years,even some of the lines thatoperated short freight trainspulled by diminutive steamlocomotives were classified aslight railways. It was not untilthe 1970s that the term “lightrail transit” came into use inthe United States. There wasno formal definition of LRT atthat time, but it was generallyunderstood to mean an urbanrail transit form that wasleaner and less costly thanother rail modes.

A formal definition wasadopted in 1989 and placed in

LRT surfacetrackage in SanJose.

Photo by Wm. H. Watts

the Transportation ResearchBoard’s Urban PublicTransportation Glossary: “Ametropolitan electric railwaysystem characterized by itsability to operate single carsor short trains along exclusiverights-of-way at ground level,on aerial structures, insubways, or occasionally, instreets and to board anddischarge passengers at trackor car floor level.”

LRT is designed toaccommodate a variety ofenvironments, includingstreets, freeway medians,railroad rights-of-way(operating or abandoned),pedestrian malls, underground

An underground LRTstation in Portland.

Photo courtesy of Tri-Met

or aerial structures, and eventhe beds of drained canals. Itis this characteristic that mostclearly distinguishes it fromother rail modes. Because ofthis design flexibility, LRTgenerally is less costly tobuild and operate than otherfixed-guideway modes.

The purpose of thisinformational booklet is toprovide an understanding ofthis increasingly populartransit mode, with particularemphasis on its application inNorth American metropolitanareas, and to address thebackground of LRT’scharacteristics andcapabilities.

3

In North America LRTemerged as an identifiedtransit mode in the 1970s,

but long before it existed inname it existed in fact. Its rootsextend back more than ahundred years.

OMNIBUS MODE

Transit service in the largercities of the United States andCanada began in the 19thcentury with the advent of theomnibus. The omnibus was anenclosed, wooden-wheeledwagon pulled by horses; ittraveled on streets that wereunpaved or that had, at best, arough surface made of stones or timber. For those travelerswho could not afford their ownhorse and buggy, the omnibuswas the only alternative towalking.

HORSECARS

As the 19th century progressed,new technologies started toemerge. Metal rails wereinstalled in the streets to providea smooth riding surface forcarriages that rolled on flanged

metal wheels. These railsoffered a much gentler ride forpassengers and significantlyreduced the effort required ofthe horses to move the cars.Moreover, the fixed guidewayprovided by the rails made itfeasible to use mechanicalpower—in place of thehorses—from a remote location.

CABLE CARS

Some of the larger cities startedto develop cable car lines. Thecars that served these lines werepropelled by a “grip” instead ofbeing pulled by a horse. Thegrip was a device placedbeneath the car that protrudedthrough a slot between the railsand into a chamber below thestreet surface. The chambercontained a moving cable that,when clamped by the grip,would move the car forward. Itwas a functional method ofpropulsion, but it wascumbersome. Before thesecable car systems becamewidespread, the more advancedtechnology of electric tractionemerged.4

ELECTRIC TRACTION

Streetcars

Developed in the 1880s, electrictraction technology allowedelectricity—used to poweronboard electric motors—to beconducted to the streetcars bymeans of an overhead wire. Theelectric streetcar proved to be sosuperior to its predecessors,both the horsecar and the cablecar, that electric railways wereconstructed rapidly throughoutthe continent in all the largecities and even many moderate-sized ones. As the electric raillines grew, development ofcable railways faltered while the omnibus mode movedswiftly toward extinction.

The seeds of LRT had beenplanted.

Once the concept ofelectrically powered railwayshad been discovered, it wasapplied in a variety of ways.Some main line railroadselectrified portions of theirtrackage to gain the benefits ofclean and powerful electrictraction. This versatile powersource also made it feasible toextend local railway linesbeyond urban boundaries intonew and future suburbs and, insome cases, cross county toother urban areas. The resultinghigh-speed, interurban linesoffered service that wasgenerally cheaper and morefrequent than the service

5

A scene in downtownNewark during thestreetcar era.

Photo by Albert L.Creamer, courtesy ofNational RailwayHistorical Society,North Jersey chapter.

offered by parallel railroadswith the same destinations.

Elevated Systems

In the largest cities, wheremajor streets became congested,railways were installed onstructures above the streets.New York and Chicago startedto build their elevatedsystems—also called “L”systems—as early as the 1870s.For the most part, these systemsused trains of railroad-type carspulled by small steamlocomotives, although in a fewcases, by cable. These elevatedlines were ideal candidates forelectric traction and werequickly converted.

Subways

This new power deliverymethod also opened otheropportunities for urbantransport. As the 20th centurydawned, Boston, New York,and Philadelphia began to placerailway tracks and stations inenclosed subways beneath thestreets—a concept that wouldhave been unthinkable withanimal or steam power.

Trolleys

The major application ofelectric traction, however, wason the urban street railways thathad supplanted the omnibusmode. The horsecar wasredesigned with electric motorsbeneath the floor, and a deviceon the roof that trolled theoverhead wire and collectedenergy to power the motors.Early on the trolling devicecame to be known as the trolley,a term that eventually identifiedthe cars, the wires, and theentire mode. In all the largecities, including the three thatwere developing subways, theelectric trolley became thedominant transit mode andwould remain so for decades.

During the second quarter ofthe 20th century, the internalcombustion engine and thepneumatic tire were refined, andpaved streets and highwayswere being constructedthroughout the metropolitanareas with public funds. Theseimprovements inspired a returnof the omnibus and familybuggy, each with muchimproved motive power andrunning gear. The electric6

trolley slowly forfeited to theautomobile not only itsdominance of the roadways butalso much of its patronage.Concurrently, the bus not onlybecame practical, but being alower capacity conveyance itwas more appropriate on theweaker lines where riding haddwindled considerably.

In the decade before WorldWar II and in the twoimmediately after, it became amatter of survival of the fittestfor the trolley mode. Ridershipdecreased as automobile useincreased and many of theinterurban lines were renderedunprofitable—all but a fewsuccumbed. The majority of streetcar lines in urban areas were either converted tobus operation or simplyabandoned.

The trolley lines that wereleast vulnerable to the erosionwere those that had substantialsections of trackage that wereon separate rights-of-way, freeof the increasingly congestedstreet traffic. During the earlydecades of the 20th century,Boston, Newark, andPhiladelphia built trolley

subways in their core areas.Pittsburgh and San Franciscoconstructed lengthy trolleytunnels under steep hills at theedge of their downtown districtsto connect street trackage therewith growing residential areason the other side of the hills. InCleveland and New Orleans thelines that survived were thosewhich had long stretches oftrackage in separate surfacerights-of-way.

By the beginning of the lastquarter of the 20th century onlythose seven cities in the UnitedStates and Toronto, Canada,had surviving trolley lines.

It was at this time that theNorth American publictransportation communityreawakened to the potential ofLRT. The depletion halted andthe trend reversed. New systemswere initiated at an average rateof nearly one per year (Table 1).Just before the close of the 20th century two newsystems—one focused on Salt Lake City and the other onJersey City—began passengerservice and brought the totalnumber of operating systems to 23. 7

TABLE 1 Dates of New LRT System Openings Since 1975

City Date

Edmonton April 1978

Calgary May 1981

San Diego July 1981

Buffalo October 1984

Portland September 1986

Sacramento March 1987

San Jose December 1987

Los Angeles July 1990

Baltimore April 1992

St. Louis July 1993

Denver October 1994

Dallas June 1996

Salt Lake City December 1999

Jersey City April 2000

8

North American LRT, aswe know it today,represents a blend of

design and operating practicesand parallels the developmentof the mode in Europe, Asia,and Australia. Today’s systemscan be categorized into twotypes:

❚ “First Generation” systemshave evolved from earliertrolley and tramway lines thatremained in operationthroughout theirtransformation.

❚ “Second Generation” systemswere designed afresh(occasionally utilizingportions of abandoned trolleyor railroad lines, or both).

In the United States andCanada there are seven FirstGeneration systems. Theyoperate in the metropolitan

areas of Boston, Cleveland,New Orleans, Newark,Philadelphia, San Francisco,and Toronto. All of the othersystems (16 at present andgrowing) are of the SecondGeneration type.

Some LRT operatingagencies like to give specialnames to their light rail lines.For example, Portland’s systemis called MAX, which stands forMetropolitan Area eXpress, andSalt Lake City’s is namedTRAX (TRAnsit eXpress). InSan Diego the light rail line issimply designated Trolley, butin San Francisco riders travel onthe Muni Metro. St. Louisrefers to their system as MetroLink, and Calgary passengersjump on the C-Train.

Regardless of type or name,all LRT systems have thefollowing basic elements:

The Church StreetLine of SanFrancisco’s FirstGeneration system.

Photo by Wm. H.Watts 9

❚ Infrastructure—composed ofthe trackways, stations, andstorage yards, including anyassociated structures, such astunnels and bridges.

❚ Rolling Stock—comprisingone or more fleet of railcarsthat carry the passengersalong the trackways.Generally, these cars aredesigned so that they can beassembled into short trains.They are sometimes referredto as vehicles, although most

statutory definitions of thatterm, including the onecontained in the UniformVehicle Code, specificallyexclude railcars.

❚ Fixed Equipment—consisting of an operationsand maintenance center, theelectric power supply,signals, and communicationsfacilities.

Each of these elements isdiscussed on following pages.

10

TRACKWAYS

LRT trackways can beconstructed in a varietyof configurations. As

with other electric railwaymodes, they can be placed onthe surface of the ground, belowthe surface in an open cut or in asubway, or above the surface onan embankment or aerialstructure.

A surface LRT trackway maybe physically separated fromvehicle and pedestrian traffic bymeans of bridges orunderpasses. It may also crossroadways and walkways atgrade, in which case theconflicting movements aretemporally separated byappropriate control devices,usually automatic crossing gatesor traffic signals.

Surface LRT trackage mayalso be constructed along astreet right-of-way, commonlyin segregated lanes butoccasionally within vehiclelanes used by general traffic.

Sub-surface trackways aregenerally positioned belowstreets and follow the streetpattern, but they can also followan independent alignment andpass under structures, parks,bodies of water, or otherrailways. Aerial trackways mayalso follow street patterns, but aremore likely to trace a differentalignment, crossing above streets,rivers, and other rail lines.

In northern climatesprovisions for snow and iceremoval must be included insystem designs and operatingplans.

11

A crossing controlledby automatic gateson Philadelphia’sLRT system.

Photo courtesy of Jack W. Boorse

STATIONS

Stations range from simpleplatforms at ground level wherepassengers can safely board andalight from trains, to elaboratestructures above or belowground, which may be accessedvia stairways, escalators, andelevators.

Underground stations, evenwhere they are far below thesurface, can be served safelybecause electric railcars emit noharmful fumes into the air.

A surface station inSan Jose.

Photo by Wm. H. Watts

STORAGE YARDS

The storage yards do not needto be elaborate. Unlike buses,electric LRT cars have noengines that are temperaturesensitive. They will startreliably in any ambienttemperature experienced byNorth American cities. There isno necessity to house them inenclosed buildings, although inextreme climates simple roofingover the storage tracks issometimes installed. Also, thecars require no fueling stations,thereby eliminating thepossibility of fuel spills.

12

The versatility of LRT asa mode is in no smallmeasure attributable to

the capabilities of the railcarsthat have been developed toserve the lines. Sometimesreferred to as light rail vehicles(LRVs), trolleys, or trains, LRTcars can be tailored to the needsof specific operatingenvironments.

Where the tracks areconstructed along, above, orbelow a public street network,the presence of adjacentbuildings or other structuresmay necessitate trackalignments that include sharpturns and steep grades. A curveradius of 25 meters (82 feet) isthe customary minimum fornew LRT lines, and longer radiiare preferable where conditionspermit. However, it is possibleto design cars to negotiatecurves with a radius as short as11 meters (36 feet).

While a maximum gradientof 5 percent is considered adesirable design criterion, therehas been a need on some newsystems to include tracksegments with gradients assteep as 7 and 8 percent. The

cars operating on those systemsnegotiate these gradientswithout difficulty. LRT carscould be designed to climb aslope of 12 percent and indeedsome predecessor streetcarlines had such gradients.However, 10 percent is nowconsidered the limit from theperspective of passengercomfort. Exotic technologieswith rubber tires or linearinduction propulsion are notneeded to conquer precipitoustrack profiles.

The use of external electricpower not only provides thecars with the muscle needed toclimb steep trackage, it alsogives them the ability to serveenclosed passenger stations that may be located insidebuildings or, more commonly,underground where an onboardcombustion engine could causea health risk. The electric poweralso provides the ability tomaintain air conditioning orheat in the car during layoverswithout wasting fuel.

Today’s LRT cars come in avariety of shapes and sizes. Ofthose currently operating in theUnited States, body widths vary13

from 2.6 to 2.9 meters (8.5 to9.5 feet). The lengths of the one-piece cars range from 15 meters(50 feet) to 20.4 meters (67 feet).When the length of the bodyexceeds that range it is splitinto two or three sections.

Those sections are hinged toeach other so that the car is ableto negotiate short-radius curves.These are called articulated carsand their lengths vary from 21 to29 meters (70 to 95 feet).

Most North American LRTsystems use articulated cars.Boston, San Francisco, andToronto operate mixed fleetsthat include some shorter carswith traditional one-piecebodies. One-piece bodies onlycomprise the fleets in Buffalo,

A Buffalo LRT car witha one-piece body morethan 20 meters inlength.

Photo courtesy of Parsons Brinckerhoff

Fort Worth, New Orleans, andPhiladelphia.

Individual cars of either typecan be assembled into a shorttrain that is controlled from thefront car. A three-car train ofarticulated cars operated by asingle driver can safely trans-port more than 400 passengers.Where conditions dictate,individual cars or multi-cartrains can be and are operated in mixed traffic.

Although, to date, it has onlybeen implemented on a testtrack, completely automaticoperation without an onboardoperator would be feasible ontrack segments that are fullyseparated from the roadwaynetwork.14

State-of-the-art electric LRTcars are neighborhood friendly.Not only are they nearly silent,but modern electronicpropulsion and braking controlenables them to stop veryquickly when necessary. Thistechnology allows them to run

An articulated carnegotiates a sharpturn in San Francisco.

Photo by Wm. H. Watts

at the appropriate speed for thezone in which they operate.

This same equipment givesthem the ability to move rapidlywhere it is safe to do so. Theusual maximum speed of LRTcars is about 90 kilometers (56 miles) per hour, but some

15

LRT cars are part ofthe neighborhood insuburbanPhiladelphia.

Photo courtesy of JackW. Boorse

recently produced cars travel asfast as 105 kilometers (65 miles)per hour. A few of theirinterurban predecessors ran at speeds as high as 145 kilo-meters (90 miles) per hour, andthere is no technological reasonwhy they could not be designedto operate at 160 kilometers(100 miles) per hour.

Contemporary LRT cars arealso passenger friendly.Because they roll on steel rails,they furnish an especiallysmooth ride. They are not onlyimmune from vertical joltingcaused by paving flaws that areunavoidable in a metropolitansetting, but also from the lateraland longitudinal lurching that iscommon with steerable, rubber-

tired vehicles. In manyapplications they can have agenerous body width so thatbroader and more comfortableseats and aisles can beprovided.

Their interiors aretemperature controlled for allseasons—in climates as diverseas those of Dallas in thesummer and Edmonton in thewinter. Externally suppliedelectric power allows them tomaintain the necessary heatingand cooling continuouslywithout any loss ofperformance, even whilesimultaneously climbing longand steep gradients. Anotherpassenger-pleasing attribute thatis inherent to electric traction is

16

A stationary lift at astation in San Jose.

Photo by Wm. H. Watts

its freedom from engine noise,vibration, and odor.

LRT cars can be especiallyfriendly to passengers withdisabilities. Some cars carrylifts like those in new buses toassist the boarding and alightingof mobility-impairedpassengers. Others havestationary lifts at the stations.

However, an increasingnumber of LRT systems arebeing designed to provide easyaccess through level boarding.This type of boarding assuresthat the floor of the car at all ormost of the doors matches theheight of the station platform.Until recently, in order toachieve level boarding it wasnecessary to design stations

with platforms about one meterabove the rails because that wasthe traditional car floor height.These high platforms exist intwo forms. The more commonis a full-length version thatprovides level boarding at everydoor. The less common form isthe mini-high platform(sometimes called a highblock), which serves only thefront door.

Today many of the newsystems (and a few of the moreestablished ones) are acquiringlow-floor cars. These cars aredesigned with floors that are onlyabout 35 centimeters (14 inches)high. This gives them the abilityto provide level boarding at alow-platform station.

17

A high-platformstation in Edmonton.

Photo courtesy of Jack W. Boorse

In addition to aidingmobility-impaired passengers,level boarding also eliminatesthe need for ambulatorypassengers to climb steps,

A mini-high platformin Denver.

Photo courtesy of T. R. Hickey

thereby expediting the boardingand alighting process andminimizing the station stoptime. The result is shorter triptimes for everyone.

18

A low-floor LRT carat a station inPortland.

Photo courtesy of Tri-Met

OPERATIONS ANDMAINTENANCECENTER

The operations andmaintenance center isthe focal point of an

LRT system. It includes acontrol room from whereoperations are coordinated,accommodations for train crewspreparing for duty, and amaintenance facility where thecars are inspected, cleaned, andrepaired. The center can alsoinclude administrative andmanagement offices.

ELECTRIC POWERSUPPLY

Two basic elements comprisethe electric power supply: anetwork of traction powersubstations and a distributionsystem. The power substationsreceive high-voltagecommercial electrical powerand convert it to medium-voltage direct current. Thedistribution system delivers that

converted power from thesubstations via overhead wiresto the individual LRT cars asthey travel along the line.

SIGNALS

The movement of the cars ortrains is guided by signals. Onsome systems all of the signalsare located alongside thetrackway. These tracksidesignals may include, or becoordinated with, traffic signalsalong the line. On other systemsonly certain signals are installedtrackside, while others aredisplayed on a console in frontof the train operator.

COMMUNICATIONSFACILITIES

Communications facilities linkthe operations and maintenancecenter with the train operatorsand other personnel. Thesefacilities range fromconventional telephone lines tothe very newest wirelesstechnologies.

19

Since the North Americanresurgence of LRT aquarter of a century ago,

operating experience generallyhas been favorable, particularlyin some metropolitan areas thatpreviously had been without railtransit service.

Adding an LRT componentto a transit system does notdrain passengers from the buslines as some observers haveclaimed. Rather, it encouragesmore people to use both bus andrail transit. Adding LRT trunklines and coordinating themwith a region’s buses to create amultimodal, multidestinationtransit system results in growthfor both modes—even in thelow-density, auto-oriented citiesof the American West.

Sacramento provides a goodexample. An examination of theFederal Transit Administration(FTA) National Transit databaseshowed that in 1987—its lastyear of all-bus operation—regional transit vehicles carried fewer than 14 millionpassengers. Eleven years laterthe system accommodatedmore than 28 million riders. TheLRT trunk line attracted over

8 million passengers, while bus ridership grew to nearly 20 million. There were similarresults in San Diego, Portland,and St. Louis.

Used appropriately, LRTenhances transit efficiency. By1998 LRT trunk lines, each 23 or more kilometers in length,had opened and were providingprimary rail services in SanDiego, Portland, Sacramento,San Jose, St. Louis, and Dallas.Previously, only buses servedthese six cities. In 1998, thesesystems operated more than3,000 buses in route serviceplus more than 500 smallvehicles in demand-responsiveservice; there were fewer than300 light rail cars. By providinghigh-capacity service on majorroutes, the LRT lines becamehighly productive,accommodating 22 percent oftotal system boardings andcarrying 30 percent ofsystemwide passenger miles butconsuming only 17 percent ofthe operating and maintenancecosts.

One-person operation oftrains (of up to four cars) makesit possible for an LRT line to do20

the work of many buses. UsingLRT results in greaterefficiency, even after taking intoaccount the cost of added staffto maintain the tracks, stations,electrification, signals, andother fixed facilities. However,achieving these economies ofscale requires a high level ofridership. That is why it makessense to provide LRT service ona transit system’s high-demandprimary corridors and to operatebuses (or even smaller vehiclesin local shuttle and circulatorservice) where they are thebetter choice on secondaryradial lines and crosstown andfeeder routes.

Only the largest, mostdensely developed cities

generate passenger volumesthat require fully grade-separated heavy rapid transitsystems. Commuter railroadsare best suited to longer radialcorridors linking cities withtheir more distant suburbs. LRTis a medium to high-capacitymode that fits well into manymetropolitan areas with goodproductivity.

One way of measuring theproductivity of a transit mode isby calculating the number ofpassenger kilometers producedper transit employee bothonboard and for support. Aproductivity comparison of themeasurements for five urbantransit modes is shown in Table 2.

21

TABLE 2 Productivity Comparison of Annual Passenger Kilometers

Annual PassengerMode Kilometers Per

Employee

Commuter (Regional) Railroads 608,200Rail Rapid Transit (Metros) 413,500Light Rail Transit (LRT) 301,618Urban Bus Transit 201,125Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) 64,360

Another measurement ofproductivity is the averagenumber of passengers carried byone vehicle. In this categoryLRT exceeds even that of thenation’s rapid transit systems.The productivity per unit (onerailcar or bus) for the threemajor urban transit modes iscompared in Table 3.

All transit modes arebasically safe. However, LRTexcels in safety and has arecord clearly superior to thatof automobile travel. Of all of

the transit modes, LRT isamong the safest. Datasubmitted to FTA documentthat LRT’s safety record evensurpasses that of urban busservice by moving people with47 percent fewer casualties perpassenger kilometer. This is tobe expected since LRT cars arereliably guided by rails andoften are located in reservedlanes or exclusive right-of-ways, as compared withoperator-steered vehiclesmaneuvering in street traffic.

22

TABLE 3 Productivity Comparison of Average Number ofWeekday Passengers

Average Weekday Passengers

Mode Per Unit

Light Rail Transit (LRT) 1,134Rail Rapid Transit (Metros) 982Urban Bus Transit 362

Yet another attribute ofLRT, which it shares with other rail modes, is its ability tostimulate growth, leading tohealthy economic developmentin the form of private sectorinvestment and higher real

estate values. The presence of amajor transit infrastructure isbroadly viewed as a promise ofpermanence. Once a rail line isbuilt, it is likely to remain for along time.

23

New residential,retail, and officedevelopment aroundthe Hazard CenterLRT station in SanDiego.

Photo courtesy of SanDiego MetropolitanTransportationDevelopment Board

What lies ahead forLRT? Thebeginning of the

21st century will see continuingexpansion of the LRT mode inNorth America. Fifteen of the23 systems now in operation areactively extending or upgradingtheir lines. There are currentlyeight future new systems invarious stages of planning ordesign.

Whether you are atransportation professional, anelected official, a civic leader,or a citizen of a metropolitanarea who is interested in thebetterment of your community,we invite you to learn as much as you can about thisincreasingly popular transitmode.

24

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD

www.TRB.org

LRT News

www.trb.org/trb/publications/LRTNews/ (July 2001)LRTv16n1.pdf

www.nationalacademies.org/trb/publications/ (June 2000)LRTNews/LRTv15n1.pdf

TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program

www4.nas.edu/trb/crp.nsf/

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

www.fta.dot.gov/

AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION

www.apta.com/

25

Transportation Research Board

The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National Resarch Council, which serves theNational Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board’s mission is topromote innovation and progress in transportation by stimulating and conducting research, facilitatingthe dissemination of information, and encouraging the implementation of research results. The Board’svaried activities annually engage more than 4,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportationresearchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contributetheir expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments,federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation,and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation.

www.trb.org

American Public Transportation Association

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) is a nonprofit association of more than1,300 member organizations including transit systems, product and service providers, planning,design, construction and financing firms, academic institutions, and state transit associations anddepartments of transportation. APTA’s mission is to serve and represent its members in makingpublic transportation an effective path to economic opportunity, personal mobility, and improving thequaltiy of life through partnerships, communication, technology, and advocacy. APTA has a visionfor the future—to be the leading force in advancing public transportation.

www.apta.com