<<  <  >  >>

Page 52

February 1995, available at http://www.transact.org/feb95/

labus.htm.

68. Consent decree in Labor/Community Strategy Center et al.

v. Los Angeles MTA, October 26, 1996, available at http://

www.ldfla.org/decree.html.

69. Dunphy, p. 113.

70. The formula is

Cost-effectiveness index = (Cap cost + Op cost -

Time savings) ÷ New riders

where

Cap cost = the annualized capital cost of the rail or

other construction alternatives (the build

alternatives) minus the cost of the transpor

tation system management alternative,

Op cost = the operating cost of the build alternatives

minus the cost of the transportation system

management alternative,

Time savings = the amount of time transit riders would save

under the build alternatives compared with

the transportation system management

alterna-

tive, and

New riders = the number of transit riders under the build

alternative minus the number under the trans-

portation system management alternative.

71. John Schumann and Suzanne Tidrick, "Status of North

American Light Rail Transit Systems: 1995 Update," in Trans-

portation Research Board, Seventh National Conference on

Light Rail Transit, p. 4.

72. Quoted in J. Hall, "The Choice: High Density or Urban

Sprawl," Wisconsin State Journal, July 23, 1995.

73. Transportation Research Board, Transit and Urban Form,

vol. 1 (Washington: National Academy Press, 1996), p. 6.

74. Ibid., p. 12.

75. Snohomish County Transportation Authority, A Guide to

Land Use and Public Transportation (Washington: U.S. Depart-

ment of Transportation, 1989); U.S. Department of Transpor-

tation, Building Livable Communities through Transportation