Abstract
Recent changes in Federal requirements for providing public transportation to the handicapped are identified. Accessible fixed‐route service and demand responsive service are evaluated as the two primary alternatives for meeting the Urban Mass Transit Administration's (UMTA) current “special efforts” requirement. The potential for accessible fixed‐route service is evaluated based on early experiences in St. Louis and Milwaukee and more recent data for Seattle. A hypothetical accessible fixed‐route system for Madison, Wisconsin, is developed using Seattle demand data and compared with the existing demand responsive system. A range of demand responsive service alternatives including the user side subsidy option are also evaluated for Madison. The analysis shows that, under ideal conditions and ignoring lift‐related delay costs, fixed‐route service can be nearly as cost‐effective as demand responsive service. Demand responsive service, however, provides for a much higher proportion of the travel needs of the...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
