During the last two decades, a number of cities have developed or considered fixed-guideway systems. Because the actions of eight metropolitan areas have been involved in the fixed-guideway evaluationprocess, a conceptual decision model could be based on their experiences. The decision process for four of the areas--portland, san diego, sacramento, and santa clara county--resulted in the constructionof light-rail transit systems; two of the cities--houston and los angeles--opted for a system of transitways, and two cities--milwaukeeand columbus--chose not to develop a fixed-guideway system. The decision process for a fixed-guideway system is a complex interaction of various issues and actors. The principal issues affecting fixed-guideway decision making are social, systemic, and funding. Social issues are external system factors such as economic development, land use impacts, and energy issues. Systemic issues, which are the technical criteria used in alternatives analysis or comparable studies, include capital and operating costs and ridership estimates. Funding issues pertain to the availability of financial resources and their impact on decision making. Actors are categorized as the public (local citizens, including special-interest and community groups), local officials (persons or groups designated to evaluate fixed-guideway alternatives), and institutions (federal and state funding agencies and various state transportation departments and commissions). The case study analysis indicates that technical criteria are not criticalfactors in fixed-guideway decision making. Instead, the decision process is dominated by political interaction among local, state, and federal officials guided by social benefits, actual or perceived, and systemic issues that influence funding for transit alternatives. This paper appears in transportation research record no. 1266, Urban public transportation research 1990.
Abstract