Sophia Germond

UNST-124K
Fall 2014
Paper 1 Annotated Bibliography

For this paper, I chose to study the effects of increased public transportation on
community health economically, environmentally, and personally, to better understand
how the Portland metro areas current public transit system could continue to improve. I
believe that the surrounding cities of Beaverton, Tigard, Tualatin, and others can benefit
from increased public transit options such as, more bus lines, more frequent MAX and
WES trains between these suburbs and Portland, and more streetcar routes.

Bibliography

1. Dueker, Kenneth, and Martha Bianco. "Light-Rail-Transit Impacts in Portland: The

First Ten Years." Transportation Research Record 1685.1 (1999): 171-80.
Transportation Research Board. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.
The journal opens by explaining the logistics for introducing mass-transit to different
communities and how it has affected communities like Los Angeles and San Francisco in
the past, and the public transit goal of having transit villages meant to be used as an
invitation for workers, shoppers and residents to drive their cars less and ride mass
transit more (171). This transitions into the introduction of east Portlands first lightrail transit line in the 1980s, and how afterwards, transit figures in Portland began to
mirror that in the rest of the country. In 1981, there was an average of 130,600 daily
riders, which increased to 198,400 in 1994. However, this was not a significant increase
in the percentage of workers to transit riders as population density increased in the city.
However, other benefits came out of the introduction of public transportation to these
areas of the city (and, in other studies, this happened in several other cities as well):
property values increased in some residential homes closer to these transit stations due to
accessibility to the citys transportation system. The study also showed that between
1980 and 1996, there was an increase in zero-one car households (and a loss in multiple
vehicle ownership) in outer rail corridors. Overall, the installation of the east side lightrail transit showed three major economic impacts: an increase in demand for singlefamily housing in the rail corridor, households in the rail corridor were less car-dependent
and oriented, and residents in the rail corridor were more likely to use the rail than
residents in the bus corridor were likely to use the bus lines. For this paper, the article
helpfully explains how public transportation has benefitted Portland in the past, and how
it could continue to benefit its and its suburbs future.

2. Frank, Lawrence D. "Land Use and Transportation Interaction: Implications on Public

Health and Quality of Life." Journal of Planning Education and Research 20.1
(2000): 6-22. SAGE Journals. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.
In Land Use and Transportation Interaction: Implications on Public Health and Quality
of Life, Frank describes public health to be the most important factor in introducing
public mass transit to communities. The implications of Quality of Life that Frank
describes are: time use (7), physical activity (7-8), and land use and air quality (8). Time
use, according to Frank, is an important factor, because we are witnessing longer
commutes and non-work trips coupled with lower average speeds (7) on highways using
personal auto vehicles, and the estimated travel time per person per day is 1.0 to 1.5
hours. Physical activity is linked to public health such that (at the time of this journals
publication in 2000) it was reported that 29% of Americans were rather sedentary and at
the risk of obesity and heart disease, and that this was possibly linked to the amount of
persons commuting via personal vehicles, rather than walking or biking at all during their
commute. Finally, land use and air quality are related through the amount of auto
emissions generated in highway corridors and cities due to the amount of personal
vehicles. Studies in Seattle and Atlanta showed that the amount of carbon monoxide
generated per household decreased as transit supportive development (8) increased.
Overall, the journal continues to explain the benefits of introducing public transportation
in areas where high populations of persons daily utilizing single-occupancy vehicles on
personal health.

3. Harford, Jon D. "Congestion, Pollution, and Benefit-to-cost Ratios of US Public

Transit Systems." Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
11.1 (2006): 45-58. ScienceDirect. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.
Congestion, Pollution, and Benefit-to-cost Ratios of US Public Transit Systems by
Hartford is a purely informational estimation of the cost-benefit analyses of public transit
systems in relation to the reduction of urban traffic congestion. This is important,
because many times, the total amount in fares collected is far less than the total amount in
operating costs for that same time period. This is subsidized by taxes paid by the general
public, and contributes to the cost/benefit analysis of having public transportation in these
communities. Traffic congestion contributes to this analysis because public
transportation will save money in these congestion costs and continue to save money
should more people utilize public transportation and drive personal vehicles less.
Harford also explains the benefits gained from reduced greenhouse gas emissions in these
suburban/urban zones. This journal is beneficial to understanding the economic factors
for public transportation, however, Harford neglects several essential parts of the article
that would make it easier for a non-academic to read and understand his journal. For
example, he neglects to explain what goes into congestion costsis it gas money, or
the amount of money spent on maintaining the roads and traffic lights and signs? The
journal would benefit from additional editing and reviewing to make reading simpler.

4. Black, A. "The Recent Popularity of Light Rail Transit in North America." Journal of
Planning Education and Research 12.2 (1993): 150-59. SAGE Journals. Web. 26
Oct. 2014.
Blacks Recent Popularity of Light Rail Transit in North America explains the
popularity of light-rail transit in several North American cities, which remains as relevant
today as it was in 1993. It explains what, exactly, light-rail transit is, and how it is
utilized in urban areas for easy hop-on, hop-off transportation that compares against
common subways and heavy-rail transit. Light-rail transit is an optimal mode of public
transportation because it can move more passengers in a corridor than busses (153),
and does not need the high demand that heavy rail transit does in order to remain
economically sustainable. It can run on city streets in the same lane as other cars and
because of this, does not pose as a high-safety concern for vehicular/light-rail accidents.
Portland currently has two light-rail systems running through its downtown: the MAX,
owned and operated by Trimet, and the Portland Streetcar. The MAX has two east/west
lines that run from Gresham to Hillsboro. However, its north/south lines do not stray
further south than downtown Portland. The Streetcar remains within downtown Portland.
The benefits of light-rail transit that this journal outlines provides proof that more of
these light-rail transit lines are beneficial to decreasing the amount of vehicular traffic
caused by those driving in and out of Portland from the suburbs.