Transit projects wait in line for funding, The Trenton Times, March 4, 2003
P-Rides could put a dent in traffic crunch, Princeton Packet Editorial, February 7. 2003
Grad student bus trial service begins, The Trenton Times, February 4, 2003
Attention turning to transit The Trenton Times, January 21, 2003
Hold off on fare hike The Star-Ledger, January 21, 2003
Tempe shifting emphasis to moving people, not cars, The Arizona Republic, 2003
WW mayor pressing for funds to study bus rapid transit Princeton Packet, January 10. 2003
Transportation fund running on empty The Star-Ledger, January 7, 2003
Summit will shape state goals for transit, The Star-Ledger, January 6, 2003
State transit picture back in disarray The Star-Ledger, November 19, 2002
Budget woes force job cuts at NJ Transit The Star-Ledger, November 14, 2002
Transport boss is moving up in Trenton The Star-Ledger, November 14, 2002
Fox in line to be McGreevey's top aide The Trenton Times, November 13, 2002
Transportation luxuries, The Trenton Times, October 21, 2002
State pledges to give light-rail line a big push, The Trenton Times, September 26, 2002
Light rail, dark outlook?, The Trenton Times Editorial, September 26, 2002
Rapid bus proposed for Rt. 1, The Trenton Times, September 16, 2002
Bus rapid transit the next wave in public transportation, The Trenton Times, September 16, 2002
Try transit during rideshare month, Princeton Packet, Sepember 6, 2002
Department of Motor Vehicles: THE SLOW LANE, The New Yorker, September 2, 2002
ON THE AIR: DRIVE SMALL, The New Yorker, September 2, 2002
More Density Needed to Support Central NJ Rapid Bus Plan, Mobilizing the Region, August 26, 2002
Orphaned Northeast Corridor Would be Capital-Starved, Not Self-Supporting, Mobilizing the Region, August 26, 2002
Bus rapid transit concept winning support, Princeton Packet, August 23, 2002
Study calls local freight line a 'choke point', Princeton Packet, August 23, 2002
DEBUNKING THE CLAIMS OF TRANSIT CRITICS, Mass Transit Magazine, August 15, 2002
Transit chief has one-track mind, The Trenton Times, August 11, 2002
Senator acts to pave way for fuel-cell, no-gas cars, The Star Ledger, August 6, 2002
Mass-transit inertia, The Trenton Times, July 28, 2002
Unclogging roads, parking, The Trenton Times, July 22, 2002
Study Lists Mass Transit Benefits, The Washington Post, July 17, 2002
Letter to the Editor: Energy Conservation, The New York Times, June 20, 2002
Amtrak deserves more support, The Trenton Times, June 12, 2002
Good news for commuters, The Trenton Times, June 2, 2002
Make transit a priority, The Trenton Times, May 30, 2002
Ride's electric - but price is a shock, Princeton Packet, May 3, 2002
Car sharing spreading across country, San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner, April 13, 2002
Build support for transit, The Star-Ledger, April 12, 2002
No free ride, The Trenton Times, April 7, 2002
Proposal for Princeton jitney service hits rough road, The Trenton Times, April 4, 2002
More Riders, and More Losses on Amtrak, The New York Times, March 10, 2002
Parking space push runs counter to urban wisdom, Baltimore Sun, February 23, 2002
Rethinking Rail Travel, Editorial, The New York Times, February 19, 2002
Transit projects wait in line for funding
Tuesday, March 04, 2003
By TOM HESTER JR.
The state's plan to spend $2.58 billion in the coming fiscal year on transportation projects focuses mostly on repairing and improving existing service, again leaving several major local projects unfunded.
But while the proposal for the budget year starting July 1 doesn't include money for the $45 million plan to rebuild the Trenton Train Station, work to rebuild the station is expected to begin next year, NJ Transit officials said.
The federal government has approved $14 million for the long-proposed project, and that money will be used on the project's first phase. NJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington said the first phase will involve revamping the station's Walnut Street entrance.
"That's a station that should have been overhauled years ago," Warrington said.
Warrington said he foresees including enough money in NJ Transit's 2004-05 capital budget to complete the project.
State and city officials described the station, also used by 10 Amtrak routes and a SEPTA line, as bland, especially for a state capitol. With a weekday average ridership of 4,600 passengers, it's the sixth busiest Amtrak station.
Plans call for increasing its size from 19,000 to 40,000 square feet, including a new level with office and retail space. Parking, architectural, landscaping and information display improvements also are planned.
The $2.58 billion spending plan, which needs legislative approval, includes $1.3 billion for the state and $1.2 billion for NJ Transit, an independent state agency. It proposes spending $290 million on bridge repairs, $222 million for rail infrastructure, $183 million for safety and roadway preservation and $172 million for new locomotives and rail cars.
"Preserving roads and bridges may not be glamourous, but it gets the job done," said state Transportation Commissioner Jack Lettiere. "It means reliability for our customers."
Lettiere said the state had to leave unfunded $2 billion in new projects, "not for a lack of will, not for a lack of time and effort, but for a lack of money," he said.
In addition to the Trenton station, among the long-discussed local projects still unfunded by NJ Transit are a $125 million plan to restore commuter rail service from Ewing's West Trenton station to Bridgewater, a $500 million plan to build the Monmouth-Ocean-Middlesex commuter rail line and a plan to extend the Southern New Jersey light-rail line from the Trenton station to the State House. The light-rail extension's cost hasn't been determined.
Warrington - as he has since coming to NJ Transit last year - said he has to "be realistic and manage expectations" because almost every community wants new transit service, but existing needs remain unmet.
"We have people who can't find a parking space today and people who perhaps can't find a seat on a train or a bus," Warrington said.
NJ Transit plans to add 30,000 train seats by spending $172 million to buy 100 bilevel passenger cars and 33 diesel locomotives that can pull longer trains.
Warrington said improving access to New York's Penn Station remains a priority. The agency wants to double the 100,000 commuters it takes daily into Manhattan.
"It's the railroad equivalent of rolling a marble through a garden hose," Warrington said of squeezing 25 trains per hour into the two existing single-track tunnels under the Hudson River. "That marble will soon become a golf ball and soon after that a baseball."
In October, NJ Transit's board approved a $4.9 million environmental impact study on a new commuter rail tunnel under the Hudson River. The project, which could cost as much as $5 billion, will be completed in "bite-size increments" during the next decade, Warrington said.
Of the $2.58 billion, about $1.1 billion would come from the state's Transportation Trust Fund, which will expire in 2004.
Gov. James E. McGreevey recently appointed a special commission that will recommend how to continue financing transportation projects.
Copyright 2003 The Times.
P-Rides could put a dent in traffic crunch
By: Packet Editorial 02/07/2003
PACKET EDITORIAL, Feb. 7
The Princeton area, like most growing suburbs, has been engaged for as far back as anyone can remember in a chicken-and-egg debate over traffic:
Which came first - the highways or the cars?
Did we build so many highways that we encouraged people to buy cars and drive? Or did so many people buy cars and drive that we had to build more highways?
Many people of many different persuasions have weighed in on this subject. Some blame construction of the interstate highway system for encouraging suburban sprawl - which, in turn, encouraged reliance on the automobile and abandonment of mass transportation over the last half-century. Others maintain that Americans couldn't resist the convenience, comfort and freedom of the automobile, creating a demand that could be satisfied only through construction of a comprehensive highway system.
This debate continues to rage in central New Jersey, as policy-makers consider projects ranging from a parking garage in downtown Princeton to a Route 1 bypass in West Windsor to a limited-access connector from Route 1 across Plainsboro to the New Jersey Turnpike. Will building the garage, the Millstone Bypass or Route 92 simply encourage more people to drive more cars, causing more congestion, more pollution and a steadily deteriorating quality of life? Or does the probability that more people will drive more cars oblige us to build more garages, more bypasses and more highways in order to relieve the congestion, pollution and diminished quality of life we're already experiencing?
What brings this question to mind is a modest experiment that began this week on the Princeton University campus. The P-Rides shuttle, a free bus that loops around the campus every 30 minutes between 8:15 a.m. and 7:45 p.m., makes stops at key locations serving graduate students and faculty who might otherwise be disposed to use their cars. If the service proves to be popular, it could reduce congestion and demand for parking not only on campus but also downtown, since some of the stops are convenient to the borough's central business district.
One high-tech feature of this service, which should increase its popularity, is its Global Positioning System, or GPS, function, allowing anyone with a computer to access real-time information about the location of the shuttle and when it will arrive at its appointed stops. Take away one of the most frequent complaints about mass transit - you never know how long you have to wait out in the cold before the bus actually shows up - and the P-Rides shuttle could turn out to be the most exciting thing to hit the Princeton campus since Nude Olympics were banned.
If the university community does climb aboard the P-Rides bandwagon, however, it may be a leap of faith to suggest that the experience could be replicated on the other side of Nassau Street. Graduate students commuting to classes across campus are one thing; workers commuting to jobs across town, across the county or across the Delaware are quite another. And while Princeton University is both independent and wealthy enough to inaugurate the P-Rides system without having to divulge how much it costs, any public agency that might wish to operate a similar system will not enjoy this luxury.
Still, any effort to institute a mass transit program that offers a realistic alternative to reliance on the automobile is worthy of strong support. And maybe, just maybe, it will turn out to have some broader, practical application. It's possible that at least one of the ideas that's been floated over the years to relieve congestion in Princeton - remote parking for employees of downtown businesses, served by a user-friendly shuttle or jitney system - could have its prototype in this campus experiment.
None of this, of course, will end the great chicken-and-egg debate over highways and cars. What it may do, however, is scramble up some support for an appealing alternative to more of both.
©Packet Online 2003
Grad student bus trial service begins
Tuesday, February 04, 2003
By ROBERT STERN
PRINCETON BOROUGH - A new shuttle-bus service designed for Princeton University's graduate students started rolling yesterday.
The free shuttle is meant primarily for graduate students.
But it is available without charge to anyone commuting between various graduate housing complexes in the borough and township and the main campus, said Pam Hersh, director of community and state affairs for the university.
The weekday service runs every 30 minutes from 8:15 a.m. to 7:45 p.m. but not on weekends, according to the university.
It's equipped with Global Positioning System technology developed by Princeton undergraduate students and engineering Professor Alain Kornhauser to provide real-time arrival information via computer.
The shuttle will keep a basic schedule so it won't be necessary for users to rely on the GPS technology to ride the bus.
But the GPS equipment will enable riders with a home computer or a hand-held computer to track the vehicle's location on its route in real-time via the Internet.
Users will then be able to more precisely match their arrival at the bus stop with that of the shuttle bus.
"By providing reliable bus transportation, we hope that the shuttle will reduce congestion and demand for parking on campus and in town and be more energy efficient than students driving their own cars," Hersh said.
The university is funding the service, which will operate as a pilot program for at least six months, Hersh said.
She declined to say how much money the university is putting into the project, describing it only as a "major" financial commitment.
She said university officials want the shuttle bus to have frequent and extensive ridership during the test period so they can justify continuing the program on a permanent basis.
Its route will have stops at the graduate college, Lawrence Apartments, Hibben-Magie Apartments, the Jadwin Physics building, the Engineering Quadrangle, parking lot 10 on William Street behind Green Hall, parking lot 21 on FitzRandolph Road by Jadwin Gym and Butler Apartments.
The system has been in the works for about a year - coinciding with a planned expansion of graduate housing at Lawrence Apartments off Alexander Road, Hersh said.
It is not in response to criticism from a local citizens' group that the university has done too little to alleviate parking and traffic congestion in the central business district, she said.
"It certainly seemed like the wise thing to do," she said.
"We chose the Lawrence Apartments location for more housing because it's close enough to bike or walk if people are ambitious. But what we were really searching for was more consistent ways of not driving," she said.
"We're hoping that people respond," she said. "We want bodies on it."
The Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association is managing the pilot program, with service provided by A-1 Limousine.
"We anticipate that the first two or three weeks will be a work in progress," said Sandra Brillhart, GMTMA's executive director. "But after the initial period, the operation should be a smooth ride."
Route maps and schedules will be available at the bus stops and online. The real-time arrival information will be available as the service is refined.
For more information about the new P-Rides shuttle service and other campus transit systems, visit the university Web site - www.princeton.edu - and look under "On Campus Travel."
Copyright 2003 The Times.
Tuesday, January 21, 2003
COMMUTING SENTENCES
A year after taking office, the McGreevey administration is starting to develop a growth and transportation policy.
During its first year, the administration was beset by a budgetary crisis brought on by the double whammy of a slumping economy and a funding shortfall surprise left by the Republicans. Gov. James E. McGreevey's biggest problem was finding a way to avoid the trap that Jim Florio fell into by raising taxes to solve budgetary problems.
That, along with issues like the appointment and subsequent ouster of Joseph Santiago as state police superintendent, kept McGreevey from focusing on transportation infrastructure improvements that affect commuters.
But McGreevey began the new year with a state transportation summit in New Brunswick that drew 1,000 attendees. It was billed as the first installment of an annual event.
McGreevey won praise for holding the summit. "McGreevey has taken full ownership of transportation policy as a public issue, even if his policies will take some time to develop," the Tri-State Transportation Campaign said.
It's expected that events like this will have more rhetoric than results, because formulating and implementing policy takes months if not years.
But McGreevey did create a blue ribbon transportation commission to develop recommendations on transportation issues the state will face in the next decade.
"Traffic and congestion costs the New Jersey economy over $7 billion each year, and families and commuters will lose 261 million hours to congestion," the governor said in a statement announcing the commission. That works out to almost $1,300 annually per driver.
The seven members of the public on the commission will represent the business, labor and environmental communities, as well as people with expertise in New Jersey transportation issues, the announcement said. The state transportation commissioner will chair the panel.
Tri-State also heaped kudos on McGreevey for promising to name an environmentalist to the panel. "A commission is standard, but no environmentalist has ever been named to a transportation commission, nor is an environmental representative on (the state's) Transportation Trust Fund Authority," the advocacy group said.
Last year, the governor did adopt a "fix-it first" strategy that requires repairing existing highways and bridges before building new ones. The administration took a similar "back-to-basics" approach with mass transit, as NJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington explained late last year in a speech at Rutgers University's Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.
"Back to basics is about drilling the agency in the basic blocking and tackling of transit service quality, reliability and capacity before the big game," Warrington said.
"Back to basics is about funding and funding policy more than anything else. New Jersey Transit's operating budget for years has been too heavily dependent on the use of funds that rightly should be used for capital projects."
At this month's summit, McGreevey directed the panel, whose citizen members haven't been named yet, to report back in a year.
Tri-State said if the commission completes the report a month early and recommends raising the state's low gas tax, a lame duck Legislature could pass an increase in a post-election session.
Raising taxes is anathema to a politician, though. Maybe McGreevey's willingness to take on the issue at the mid-point of his first term will show how eager he really is to address the state's transportation needs.
NOTE: Michael Lavitt lives in central New Jersey and commutes to New York. He can be contacted through The Times, by e-mail at commute@prontomail.com or at (732) 266-7239. Be sure to include your phone number.
Copyright 2003 The Times.
Tuesday, January 21, 2003
NJ Transit has cut jobs, cut its auto fleet and begun to reduce the number of expensive outside consultants. The agency even closed its money-losing Transit Shoppe souvenir outlet in Newark Penn Station.
What agency executives and other administration leaders have not yet done is reveal whether they will be hitting bus and rail riders with another fare hike in the coming months.
They shouldn't, especially not if the money is handled the way it was last year. NJ Transit raised fares an average of 10 percent, not an insignificant amount for regular commuters. Still, the increase produced only about $38 million for the $1 billion-a-year agency, and Trenton promptly performed some budget shenanigans, pulling back on other funds that had been destined for transportation so that NJ Transit, and its riders, ended up barely treading financial water.
That 10 percent hike was planned as the first in a series, with fares to rise almost automatically in subsequent years by the rate of inflation. That would be about 4 percent this year.
Mass transit advocates are having none of it. Their view is that fares should remain the same and NJ Transit should be given more money from some other source, probably a hike in the state's 10.5-cent gasoline tax.
It is unrealistic to think drivers will be willing to pay more at the pump without seeing a good share of the money go to improve the state's worn roads and bridges.
It is also unrealistic to think that fares can remain unchanged for long. NJ Transit faces a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall over the next several years. Fares will have to be part of a combination solution, along with more spending cuts and, yes, some increase in the gas tax. It is the third-lowest in the nation, and it has not gone up in almost 15 years.
But all those things should be addressed together. Gov. James E. McGreevey's administration owes train and bus riders more than just another stopgap fare hike, even one as modest as 3 or 4 percent. Riders and drivers deserve a coherent policy on how we will pay for our transportation system. As it is, political calcuations do more to drive decisions than planning does.
The governor's new transportation fact-finding commission is to start work in a few weeks. It is to come up with long-term solutions to the chronic underfunding of our roads, buses and trains.
NJ Transit should wait for the commission's recommendations, along with a statewide road and transit "master plan" now being developed by the Department of Transportation, before moving for a premature cost-of-living fare hike.
Copyright 2003 The Star-Ledger.
Tempe shifting emphasis to moving people, not cars
By Alia Beard Rau
Jan. 16, 2003For the first time in city history, Tempe has turned its transportation focus from cars to pedestrians.
"The intent here is to try to make up for prior planning which emphasized the automobile and ignored other issues," Mary O'Connor, deputy public works manager, told zoning commissioners this week.
"This time we are looking at alternatives to road widening."
City staff and residents have spent three years creating a comprehensive transportation plan that will serve the city through 2020.
The goal is to improve the city's ability to move people instead of vehicles. The city hopes to reduce reliance on the single-occupancy automobile by improving public transit systems, and by making pedestrians and bicyclists a prior- ity.
Only one street, Priest Drive south of Carver Road, is marked for construction.
The plan suggests providing bicycle and pedestrian access from all neighborhoods to schools, parks and shopping. It puts transit service within a 10-minute walk from every home. It builds and widens sidewalks and puts bike lanes on every main street. It increases express bus service and offers light rail.
"This is important because we are going from a growing community to a redevelopment and infill community," O'Connor said Wednesday.
The plan goes before the Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing and vote Jan. 28 and then on to the City Council.
©The Arizona Republic, 2003
WW mayor pressing for funds to study bus rapid transit
By: Gwen Runkle , Staff Writer 01/10/2003
State asked to approve $350,000 grant.
WEST WINDSOR - Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh is urging the state Department of Transportation to help the township bring a new mass transit alternative to the area to help alleviate growing traffic congestion along the Route 1 corridor.
The mayor wants the DOT to approve a $350,000 grant application the township submitted in mid-October as part of the DOT's new Livable Communities Program to fund a study of bus rapid transit.
Bus rapid transit is a relatively new alternative to typical bus service that touts amenities such as reduced travel times, quieter rides and convenient "smart card" fare collection. Bus rapid transit uses "sleeker" and more fuel-efficient vehicles, which can operate either on exclusive fixed guideways - two-way concourses reserved for the buses to ensure fast and reliable service - or regular roadways.
"Several groups, like the Central Jersey Transportation Forum and Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association, have taken a look at bus rapid transit and found it to be a viable option for our area," Mayor Hsueh said.
"But their work was really on just general concepts. We want to take up a detailed study of how to tie land-use planning to possible alignments, figure out how to implement such a system, how to get funding and develop a public outreach program to get the entire region involved."
West Windsor already has received word from one major property owner in the township - Sarnoff Corp. - that it intends to participate in the bus rapid transit system and has made bus rapid transit a major consideration for future development as part of its master plan.
But the progress of projects such as Toll Brothers' 1,165-unit housing development off Bear Brook Road and Wyeth Inc.'s plans to create a mixed-use development on the former American Cyanamid site with the help of the Rouse Co. make starting the study an urgent matter, the mayor said.
"It's important to start working on this," he said. "We want to prevent the region from becoming another North Jersey overly clogged kind of traffic pattern. West Windsor is willing to take the lead. We have put $15,000 out to begin collecting background information, but we need the grant to really get started. We don't plan to go this alone."
John Dourgarian, spokesman for the DOT, said the department is working as fast as it can.
"Application review is ongoing and we expect to announce the grant recipients before the end of the month," he said.
In preparation, Mayor Hsueh said he is in the process of setting up a public hearing on a bus rapid transit system with the township Planning Board, during which participation by surrounding municipalities will be welcomed.
The mayor said the township's study could start off by delineating specific routes for an 8-mile bus rapid transit system proposed by the Central New Jersey Transportation Forum.
The forum has proposed a system that would have fixed bus rapid transit guideways running in a strip of land between Route 1 and the Northeast Corridor train line, from a proposed park-and-ride parking lot off I-295 in Lawrence to Ridge Road near the border of Plainsboro and South Brunswick townships.
The Princeton Junction and Hamilton rail stations would be connected and the line could include stops in West Windsor at the former American Cyanamid complex, along Meadow Road, in Carnegie Center and at Sarnoff Corp.
It also could run parallel to the Princeton "Dinky" train line with a stop at the Dinky station. A stop at Palmer Square would connect the fixed guideway service with street-running bus rapid transit services.
Stops at the Forrestal Center and FMC Corp. in Plainsboro, with street-running service to the former Princeton Nurseries site, are being considered as well.
"This is just one option," Mayor Hsueh pointed out. "We're open and welcome suggestions for other alignments."
©Packet Online 2003
Transportation fund running on empty
Summit to explore options for new revenue, including gas tax hike
Tuesday, January 07, 2003
BY JOE MALINCONICO
Star-Ledger StaffOn the verge of falling $3 billion in debt, the trust fund that pays for New Jersey's road and mass transit projects poses a dilemma for the officials and experts convening at the governor's transportation summit today.
Experts say state officials must find new sources of revenue -- like increasing the gasoline tax -- to pay off the debt and keep churning out road and mass transit projects.
Otherwise, the Transportation Trust Fund's mounting debt will eat up a growing share of its revenue, which would leave less cash to pay for new projects.
"They're getting close to the point where they're running on fumes," said Martin Robins, executive director of Rutgers University's Transportation Policy Institute.
"We've got to do something and it's up to the (McGreevey) administration to come up with a plan," said Assemblyman Alex DeCroce (R-Morris), a member of the transportation committee. "It's up to us in the Legislature to determine whether it's feasible or not."
Today's summit, at the Hyatt in New Brunswick, is designed to "raise awareness" about the state's transportation funding challenges, state officials said.
The stakes are high because the trust fund provides about half the money used for major transportation projects in New Jersey, such as rebuilding the Route 78 viaduct in Newark and construction of the new light rail line between Trenton and Camden. The federal government provides the other half.
"They're going to need new revenue sources because the needs are not going away, the needs are growing dramatically," said Phil Beachem, president of the New Jersey Alliance for Action, a coalition of contracting firms, labor unions and businesses.
Taxes on auto sales and wholesale petroleum products generate about $200 million a year each for the trust fund. But neither of the sources offers extra revenue that could be funneled into the transportation program.
Meanwhile, New Jersey's gasoline tax generates more than $400 million per year for the Transportation Trust Fund. In privately justifying a possible increase, officials point out that New Jersey imposes the third-lowest gasoline tax in the nation, at 10.5 cents per gallon.
Officials have about 18 months before the current law that provides money for the trust fund expires. But experts say the state should not wait that long before it does something about the fund.
Not only do officials need to decide whether to increase the gasoline tax to replenish the fund, but they also would have to determine how much they want to increase the tax and when they want to do it.
With control of the Legislature at stake in November's elections, timing will be crucial, transportation experts said.
Janine Bauer, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Committee, a watchdog group, said she thinks officials miscalculated the public's opposition to raising gasoline taxes for the program.
"I think there are a lot of motorists and transit riders who understand the situation with our infrastructure and the need to invest more money in it," Bauer said.
For example, she recalled watching a television report last week about the New Jersey Turnpike's new toll increase, during which she said two of the three motorists interviewed supported the hike. In addition, she cited the public's support for transportation bond issues in recent years.
"People have heard the message," she said.
In his speech at the summit, Gov. James E. McGreevey will create a "blue-ribbon commission" on transportation, officials said.
Robins said the panel will give credibility to the governor's plans.
"Whatever they come up with, eggs are going to be broken," Robins said. "There are projects that aren't going to be pursued and there are going to be sacrifices asked for from the public. This commission, if it's done properly, will provide the governor with a case for what needs to be done."
Joe Malinconico covers transportation. He can be reached at jmalinconico@starledger.com or (973) 392-4230.
Copyright 2003 The Star-Ledger.
Summit will shape state goals for transit
Governor has initiatives but lacks funding plan
Monday, January 06, 2003
BY JOE MALINCONICO
Star-Ledger StaffGov. James E. McGreevey is expected to unveil a number of initiatives at a transportation summit Wednesday, but will leave unanswered how to finance them.
Facing the demand for roughly $5 billion worth of transportation projects that have been proposed, McGreevey will meet with hundreds of experts and officials to start working on strategies for improving the state's roads and mass transit systems.
Officials said McGreevey would create a special transportation commission and issue an executive order calling for enhanced highway safety, more parking at train stations and better road signs.
Highlighting spots in the state where congestion and accidents are the worst, McGreevey also will demand that construction gets done more quickly on projects designed to fix such problems.
What the governor will not be saying is exactly how he wants to pay for all work, officials said.
Various transportation advocacy groups say the answer is clear -- there should be an increase in the state's gasoline tax, one of the lowest in the nation.
But the watchdogs do not expect the governor and his transportation aides to take on the gasoline tax challenge just yet, especially while they are still bruised from their failure to get the Legislature to pass their Division of Motor Vehicles reform bill last month.
"They don't want the t-word to come up" at the summit, said Janine Bauer, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, referring to the gasoline tax.
"We all know the needs far outweigh the funds available," said Jack Lettiere, acting state transportation commissioner. "We have to map out our strategy before we start asking for money. The objective of the summit is to have a discussion of transportation problems and strategies to fix them."
The next 18 months are critical ones for New Jersey's transportation system. The federal and state laws that provide multi-year funding for transportation projects are expiring and new versions will have to be drawn up.
In Washington, New Jersey's representatives will be vying with other states for a share of the pot, a task made more difficult as power in Congress continues to shift more toward the South and the West.
In Trenton, officials are going to have to come up with a way to replenish New Jersey's Transportation Trust Fund.
"They have to address the funding issue and the gasoline tax is the right way to do it," said Leonard Resto, president of the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers. "They can't continue to pretend that this problem doesn't exist. That's what they're doing. They say, 'Later.' We'd like later to become now."
"They're afraid of being accused of raising the gas tax, so no one suggests it," said Ray Neveil, president of Citizens Against Tolls. Neveil's group says increasing the gas tax would be fairer than continuing to levy tolls on some state highways, but not others.
The summit is being sponsored by the New Jersey Alliance for Action, a group that has worked hard behind the scenes in recent years on behalf of a gasoline tax increase. The alliance is a coalition of contracting firms, labor unions and businesses.
"In terms of the big picture, transportation is probably the biggest thing that drives the economy," said Phil Beachem, president of the alliance. "It's not just the jobs that come when a company decides to relocate here, but there's also the jobs created to build the projects."
Beachem said McGreevey was setting the agenda for Wednesday's meeting. Officials said the governor may make general comments about the transportation funding situation, but McGreevey would not propose specific sources for the needed money.
"He's going to have to take on a very delicate and difficult task," said Martin Robins, head of Rutgers University's Transportation Policy Institute. "There are some very challenging issues whenever you're talking about ways to raise money for transportation."
Robins said the funding issue boiled down to a two-part question. The first is where is the state going to get the money and the second will be what projects should get funded.
"There are some thinks that are going to fall by the wayside," Robins said.
Bauer, from the Tri-State watchdog group, was not impressed with some of the proposals McGreevey plans to include in his executive order.
"Things like parking at train stations and improved signage are technocratic responses that aren't going to make much of a difference to the average person," Bauer said.
Joe Malinconico covers transportation. He may be reached at jmalinconico@starledger.com or at (973) 392-4230.
Copyright 2003 The Star-Ledger.
State transit picture back in disarray
Experts split on impact of DOT executive's exitTuesday, November 19, 2002
BY JOE MALINCONICO
Star-Ledger StaffBack in February, the job of being New Jersey's transportation commissioner seemed as inviting as driving through a mine field.
Crisis after crisis was exploding in state officials' faces: the E-ZPass debacle, the mess at the Division of Motor Vehicles, overcrowded trains and congested roads.
Jamie Fox hopped behind the wheel anyway. An astute political player with little expertise in transportation, he managed to chart a reform route that drew praise from some of the state's toughest critics.
But now, Fox is becoming Gov. James E. McGreevey's chief of staff, leaving the transportation department midway through the mine field.
Experts say they would have preferred that Fox stay in the commissioner's job, but they disagree on whether his departure portends renewed problems for the state's transportation system.
"This is terrible for transportation in New Jersey," said Janine Bauer, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign. "Since I've been in this position, we've had six different commissioners."
Others see Fox's shift closer to McGreevey's side as a benefit for the state's highways, trains and bridges.
"As chief of staff, he'll be the Governor's alter ego on a lot of policy issues and it can't hurt that he knows transportation and is sensitive to its needs," said Martin Robins, director of Rutgers University's Transportation Policy Institute.
Transportation insiders say Fox's deputy transportation commissioner John Lettiere has the inside track. Lettiere is a 27-year veteran of the department who has won the McGreevey administration's trust during the past year.
Lettiere's résumé features the transportation credentials that Fox lacked. An engineer, he has been in the trenches for decades and has overseen major state road projects.
"He's a solid professional," Robins said.
Lettiere, however, does not possess Fox's political skills. That savvy comes in handy when dealing with legislators and mayors who come calling for new traffic lights or road repairs. It is even more crucial in the maneuvering required to get transportation funding, a high- stakes contest in which billions of dollars are in play.
In two areas, New Jersey happens to be approaching a crossroads when it comes to transportation money. The federal transportation funding bill expires next year, while the state's own funding formula is up for renewal the year after that.
In the tussle for federal transportation cash, many in New Jersey were counting on Fox's connections in Washington, D.C. He had worked there for about two decades, first as an aide to U.S. senators from this state and later as executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
In Trenton, Fox already had been working behind the scenes, laying the groundwork for support from legislators for an increase in New Jersey's gasoline tax. Officials see a possible gasoline tax increase as crucial to the state's strategy for paying for major road and bridge projects.
"They're moving him (Fox) out of there before he's had the chance to do what I see as his two primary jobs," said Bauer. "As chief of staff, he can probably still make the gas tax happen, but I don't think he can work Washington from Trenton, too. He can't do that while he's looking out for Jim McGreevey's poll numbers and everything else that comes with being chief of staff."
Others disagree.
"Moving to the front office doesn't mean he can't continue to do those things," said Assemblyman Alex DeCroce of Morris County, the ranking Republican on the transportation committee. "I think he would still carry the same type of influence in Washington."
Officials close to the McGreevey administration say Fox will continue to have considerable sway on the state's transportation policies and will make sure the reforms he set in motion take place. He has put his stamp on NJ Transit by hiring George Warrington, a railroad veteran, to overhaul that troubled agency.
Among Fox's works that remain in progress are:
* Negotiating a deal with the state's new E-ZPass contractor. The basic agreement already is in place, but the changes in the system are still months away from being complete. The McGreevey administration has made a priority of fixing the high-profile fiasco.
* Gaining legislative approval for the Governor's plan to fix the Division of Motor Vehicles and implementing massive changes in an agency that directs more than 5 million motorists.
* Engineering the merger of the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway authorities, which was promised by McGreevey during last year's gubernatorial campaign.
"You really hate to lose somebody who has shown that kind of leadership," said Steve Carrellas, New Jersey coordinator of the National Motorists Association. "I really had faith that under him things at DOT were really going to get done. Hopefully, the things he's started will continue with whoever gets his job."
Joe Malinconico covers transportation. He can be reached at jmalin conico@starledger.com or at (973) 392-4230.
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger.
Budget woes force job cuts at NJ Transit
Executive director says 'modest increase' in fares is possible due to money problems
Thursday, November 14, 2002
BY JOE MALINCONICO
Star-Ledger StaffNJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington said yesterday the state's cash-starved mass transit agency plans to shed 170 administrators and other nonunion workers to save about $15 million a year on its payroll.
Warrington announced the cuts during a speech yesterday recapping his first six months in the post. He said the staff reduction, along with $14 million worth of other operating cutbacks, would help the agency balance next year's budget.
Information from Our AdvertisersWarrington was evasive when asked if the agency would attempt next year to impose the inflationary fare increase of about 3 percent, which is permitted under a financial plan that was adopted back in January. He said a "modest increase" was not an "unreasonable expectation," considering the agency's financial status.
The agency raised fares by an average of 10 percent in April and would have to hold public hearings before raising them again.
"They would have a hard time selling another fare increase at this point in time," said Len Resto, president of the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers.
During his first six months in office, Warrington said NJ Transit has conducted a comprehensive review of the way it does business.
"As a result of that assessment, we are expected to realize an annual $29 million savings over the next year by optimizing processes and reducing staffing levels," he said.
Warrington said about half the 170 jobs being cut would come through retirements, while the rest would be layoffs and reassigning workers to vacant posts. NJ Transit has about 1,970 nonunion workers on its payroll of about 11,000 people.
Warrington said other savings would come from:
* Reducing the use of outside consultants.
* Slashing the agency's auto fleet by 15 percent, or 25 vehicles.
* Closing the Transit Shoppe in Newark Penn Station.
* Overhauling the screening and recruiting process for new employees so money is not wasted on training people who quit in the process.
Warrington touted a variety of accomplishments during his first six months, including increasing the numbers of rush-hour trains and implementing new cleaning standards for trains and buses.
Watchdog groups offered reserved praise for Warrington's efforts.
"It's a good thing that NJ Transit has gotten back to basics," said Janine Bauer, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.
"There were so many different issues he had to address and he's done it reasonably well, considering the constraints he's been under," said Resto.
However, Resto also criticized Warrington for backing away from the previous administration's tendency to promote numerous proposals for new train projects.
"Granted they don't have the money to do them right now, but they should have a vision for what they want to do in the years ahead," Resto added. "That vision, right now, is missing."
Joe Malinconico covers transportation. He can be reached at jmalinconico@starledger.com or at (973) 392-4230.
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger.
Transport boss is moving up in Trenton
Fox to reorganize McGreevey office
Thursday, November 14, 2002
BY JEFF WHELAN AND JOSH MARGOLIN
Star-Ledger StaffIn what is shaping up as the first major shake-up in his administration, Gov. James E. McGreevey will move his transportation commissioner into the front office as his chief of staff, administration sources said yesterday.
Jamie Fox, a widely respected and hard-nosed Democratic strategist with two decades of experience, will assume the powerful post in mid-January and is expected to implement significant changes to the Governor's inner circle. Gary Taffet, whom McGreevey has relied on as his right-hand man for nearly 14 years, announced his resignation this week.
One of Fox's deputy commissioners, John Lettiere, is the front-runner to take command of the Transportation Department, with Fox's backing, according to numerous sources. While Fox has earned strong reviews for tackling the state's E-ZPass crisis and problems at the Division of Motor Vehicles, Lettiere has been known as "Steady Eddie" inside the administration for managing the agency's day-to-day operations.
The appointment of Lettiere would allow Fox to continue to wield considerable influence at the department, sources close to him said. Fox has launched several initiatives, including his overhaul of the DMV, that he has an interest in seeing through, the sources said.
The reshuffling in the administration comes after a tumultuous first year in office and at a time when McGreevey's poll numbers have dipped. The Governor won praise for closing a historic budget gap, seeking education reforms and tackling the state's auto-inspection mess this year. But he has also been criticized over several appointments -- most notably State Police Superintendent Joseph Santiago, who recently resigned under pressure -- and for secretly dealing with the National Rifle Association on gun control legislation.
Taffet isn't the only one leaving McGreevey's inner circle.
Jo Astrid Glading, McGreevey's chief of policy and communications, will soon move to a legal job at the Department of Law and Public Safety after a year of overseeing the Governor's policy staff and press office, according to four sources close to the negotiations.
The Governor has had difficult relations with the Statehouse press corps almost from the moment he took office. Glading has also been at odds with Cabinet officials in her role as policy chief. Glading, an attorney, last night denied her departure is imminent.
One official said Fox is going to be taking a hands-on role in the Governor's communications department.
Possible successors as chief of policy include Mitchel Ostrer, who works under Glading, and Amy Mansue, a deputy chief of staff. The other two deputy chiefs of staff, Kevin Hagan and James Gee, are expected to remain in their posts.
Asked about all the pending personnel moves, McGreevey spokesman Kevin Davitt said: "Nothing has been decided at this point."
Fox brings a wealth of experience to the front office that includes stints as a top aide to U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, deputy chief of staff to former Gov. Jim Florio, and chief of staff to U.S. Sen. Robert Torricelli. Eric Shuffler, Fox's top lieutenant at Transportation and another former Torricelli adviser, will join him in a high-level position in the front office, according to numerous sources.
Torricelli said yesterday Fox would bring an entirely different style of management to McGreevey's office, which has been criticized as inexperienced and lumbering. He said Fox believes in "total, total command."
"We believed in democracy but we didn't practice it," Torricelli said. "My best advice to Jim McGreevey would be to establish a division of labor with Jamie where he's more than a member of the senior staff but actually administers it."
That is precisely what Fox and McGreevey are planning to do, according to three sources familiar with their plans. After being sworn in, McGreevey established an unusual structure in his front office in which the chief of staff shares control with three other chiefs. All four have equal power and report directly to the Governor. Critics say the system encouraged internal rivalries and McGreevey's tendency to micromanage.
"There are just too many chiefs. Clearly, you need some better decision making," said one administration official who requested anonymity.
As news of Fox's move spread throughout the state capital yesterday, Democrats and Republicans alike praised McGreevey's choice.
"He's got a proven track record," said Harold Hodes, a Democratic lobbyist and chief of staff to former Gov. Brendan Byrne.
"He's one of the brighter lights in the administration," said Senate Co-President John Bennett (R-Monmouth). "He has certainly communicated with my side of the aisle very admirably. He calls us. He responds. He's a good listener."
Lettiere began at DOT as an industrial engineer, rising to a deputy commissioner in charge of the agency's $2.5 billion capital program. He served as acting commissioner before Fox was confirmed. Lettiere of Trenton has a B.S. in industrial engineering from the former General Motors Institute of Technology in Flint, Mich., and an MBA from Rider University.
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger.
Fox in line to be McGreevey's top aide
Wednesday, November 13, 2002
By JIM GOODMAN
TRENTON - State Transportation Commissioner Jamie Fox, who has worked for U.S. Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Robert Torricelli and former Gov. Jim Florio, is in line to be Gov. James McGreevey's next chief of staff.
McGreevey declined to confirm Fox as his choice yesterday when he announced that Gary Taffet, his current chief of staff and longtime political confidant, will leave the administration in January.
But a key administration source commented, "There's only one horse in this race and he's named Jamie."
Try Our ClassifiedsIt will be the latest shake-up in the embattled, 10-month-old McGreevey administration but Taffet's departure is apparently his own decision. McGreevey said Taffet had said from the beginning he would only serve 12 to 18 months.
Fox, 47, is one of the most seasoned political operatives in the Democratic Party, working his way up from an executive post with the state Senate to a top aide to Florio and later to Lautenberg and Torricelli.
Some high profile Democrats wondered privately yesterday whether Fox could work with a governor whose reputation as a micro-manager has become legendary.
But others said Fox's ability to work effectively with such demanding bosses as Florio, Lautenberg and Torricelli gives him a better than even chance of prospering in the McGreevey administration.
"He's a survivor in that he worked under three chiefs of staff in the Florio administration," one administration source said. "No one else could come close to doing that."
Since taking his post as transportation commissioner last February, Fox has blossomed as one of the few stars in the McGreevey administration, winning high marks from legislators, lobbyists and others who deal regularly with the department and the governor's office.
"He's the best thing that McGreevey has going for him," a veteran lobbyist who is also a former state official commented recently. "Everybody loves him: Republicans, Democrats, you name them."
There has been speculation that McGreevey is also considering Amy Mansue, a deputy chief of staff who held a similar post in the Florio administration, but administration sources ruled her out.
A legislator who described himself as friendly to Taffet said the chief of staff suffered from "burnout" in a job that made it difficult to spend time with his young family.
Fox is single and his reputation for working long hours is hard to top.
"The McGreevey staff has a lot of problems but I don't think anyone blames them on Taffet," an influential senator commented. "If anyone can do that job, its Jamie Fox. He's an expert at dealing with people."
The governor's first year in office has been marred by several controversies including the choice of Joseph Santiago to head the state police.
Santiago, who had pleaded guilty to an assault charge when he was the director of the Newark city police force, was forced to resign last month. Santiago admitted he had demanded to see the state police reports on internal investigations of his conduct.
The Attorney General's Office is still considering whether to file charges against him.
Another embarrassing controversy that called McGreevey's judgment into question was his appointment of Golan Cipel, an Israeli citizen, to direct the state's homeland defense program.
Cipel left that post when it was reported that as a non-citizen he was not entitled to see confidential security reports.
Taffet's role in those controversies are not known but one state legislator familiar with the events said, "Gary Taffet can't be blamed for Cipel or Santiago. Those problems are entirely the governor's fault."
Fox's knowledge of ground-level politics in New Jersey is legendary. Politicians who have worked with him say he can go into almost any town in the state and be able to identify and know personally the people most important to talk to.
McGreevey did say yesterday that Fox's demonstrated expertise at dealing with the federal government would be an asset if he becomes his chief of staff.
The governor said new strategies will have to be worked out in dealing with the Bush administration as the Republicans take over control of both houses of Congress, including federal highway funds.
New Jersey's $2 billion road and mass transportation programs are dependent on about $1 billion of federal funds.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Monday, October 21, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
Jamie Fox, New Jersey's transportation commissioner, and George Warrington, head of New Jersey Transit, have pointed to the Trenton-Camden light rail line now under construction as an example of misplaced transportation priorities. Given the state's long list of highway and mass-transit needs and sharply limited funding, they say, it's essential that money be spent to improve the capacity, efficiency and safety of the existing transportation infrastructure rather than to begin new projects from scratch. That's particularly true when a project is justified not as a way to meet a transportation need but rather as a generator of economic development - which was how the Whitman administration defended its decision to build the light rail, a decision that will cost the state an estimated $73 million a year for the next 17 years. It's money that could have been well spent on new trains, additional parking at busy stations along the Northeast Corridor, and improved access to the area's greatest commuter magnate, New York City.
Last week's news brought to mind another Whitman administration commitment of transportation dollars that was touted as a catalyst for development. In 1996, the state agreed to build a tunnel connecting Atlantic City's major roads to the undeveloped Marina district, where the tunnel's chief promoter, Steve Wynn, proposed to build a $1.5 billion Mirage casino complex. The tunnel cost the state $220 million and required the destruction of nine homes in a middle-class neighborhood. Now the company, which has since been acquired by MGM Grand, has put its planned casino on hold while it checks out its opportunities in other promising gambling venues, such as Las Vegas, Detroit and Biloxi.
Other new or under-construction casinos will benefit from the tunnel, and MGM Grand eventually may carry out its plan to build in the Marina. Nevertheless, crowded New Jersey can't ignore the lesson of these expensive experiences. We must use scarce transportation dollars to meet real transportation needs - and we must meet the most urgent needs first.
Information from Our AdvertisersCopyright 2002 The Times.
State pledges to give light-rail line a big push
Thursday, September 26, 2002
By TOM HESTER JR.
They've deemed it a waste of $1 billion that will drain state coffers for years to come, but state transportation officials say they'll do what they must to make the Trenton-to-Camden light-rail line a success.
During a special joint hearing Tuesday involving two Assembly panels, state Transportation Commissioner Jamie Fox and NJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington said the Southern New Jersey Light Rail Transit System will cost the state $73 million per year - $48 million in debt for the next 17 years and $25 million to cover annual operating losses.
Fox said the project, initiated by Gov. Christie Whitman's administration, would never have been approved by the current administration.
Still, the 34-mile line, with 20 stops between Trenton and Camden, has been under construction since May 2000, and Fox said halting construction now would cost as much as continuing.
So what's to be done with a $1 billion rail line that will go through uncongested areas and attract only an estimated 4,500 daily riders when it begins running next year?
"We're going to make this work because we're now in a $1 billion project that we have a responsibility to make work," Fox told state legislators.
Warrington said the state is considering several ideas to promote the rail line and boost ridership, including:
-- Free parking at light-rail stations. Park-and-ride facilities are planned for Route 73 south of Palmyra, south of Burlington City and in Florence, and parking lots are planned for the 36th Street, Taylor's Lake and Riverside stops.
-- Adjusting local bus routes to emphasize the light-rail line and reduce competition.
-- Discounted transfers between the light-rail line and the PATCO High-Speed Line in Camden.
-- Free bus transfers to the light-rail line.
-- An extensive marketing campaign that would especially target students at Rutgers University's Camden campus.
Warrington said the state also would do whatever it could to encourage development along the line.
The Whitman administration touted the line as an economic development tool, and officials from several municipalities along the line said it already has attracted increased interest in their communities from developers.
Victor Vittorino, deputy mayor in Delanco, said a manufacturer that makes parts for modular homes has decided to build a $6 million facility in his municipality, while Harry Van Sciver, planning board chairman in Beverly, said a long-vacant manufacturing building in his small city will be turned into 25 apartments for senior citizens.
Andrew Carten, Trenton planning director, said a builder has expressed interest in building a mixed-use development at Route 129 and Cass Street, near one of the light-rail stations.
Fox and Warrington and several Assembly Democrats scoffed at spending transportation money to promote economic development, claiming the $1 billion that will be spent on the Trenton-to-Camden line could have been more wisely spent on other transportation projects.
Yet, Warrington said expecting such development is realistic. He said 15 million square feet of new office space has sprung up along the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail in Jersey City alone.
"The prospects for this kind of development along the South Jersey light rail can be very real," he said.
Several have speculated NJ Transit would have to offer free rides when the light-rail line begins operating to try to boost its popularity, but Fox said fares definitely will be charged. The amount of the fares has not been set.
Copyright 2002 The Times
Thursday, September 26, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
Continuing to criticize former Gov. Christie Whitman for the costly mistakes of her administration is no fun - unless you happen to be a deeply partisan Democrat - and is getting tiresome besides. But the state of New Jersey is stuck with the consequences of those errors, and it must learn from them and try to avoid similar ones in the future. It's becoming clear that the Trenton-Camden light-rail line now under construction, if not a mistake, was at least a misplaced priority, given the massive transportation needs of New Jersey and the limited dollars available to meet those needs.
The $1 billion line, which was approved by Gov. Whitman at the behest of South Jersey legislators and is scheduled to open next year, will use an existing freight track that runs 34 miles through the riverfront towns of Camden and Burlington counties. It was the subject of a legislative hearing in Burlington City Tuesday. Here are some of the hard facts about the project that came out at the hearing or were already known:
-- It's being built without federal money, the only light-rail system in the country with that dubious distinction. The reason, said NJ Transit Director George Warrington, is that federal aid is contingent on the use of comprehensive planning procedures that probably would have eliminated the Trenton-Camden route because more viable options would have been found.
-- Although no mass transit system turns a profit, this one, which passes through lightly populated areas, is likely to do more poorly than most. Its projected return on the state's investment is only 12 to 15 percent, compared to a 65 percent return on all NJ Transit's systems. It's expected to cost some $73 million annually in debt service and operating losses.
-- Because the trolley-like diesel cars will share the tracks with freight trains, they'll have to stop running at 10 p.m., a curfew that will sharply curtail their potential usefulness. For example, although a light-rail station is located directly across Route 129 from the Mercer Sovereign Bank Arena, the service will be of no value to persons attending evening events there; nor will it help concertgoers at Camden's Tweeter Center, at the other end of the line.
-- The rationale for the project was not to meet an existing or projected need but to promote economic development in the depressed river towns. As Transportation Commissioner Jamie Fox put it: "Every rail line attracts economic development. However, we do not have the luxury of funding a $1 billion project simply to attract business, not while people are waiting years to get a parking space near a rail station, not while bus stations are falling down, not while Route 1 is gridlocked or the Parkway still has traffic lights instead of exits."
The lesson to be learned is that transportation money is too precious to be spent to satisfy political demands, and that projects should be approved only after undergoing a rigorous evaluation, planning and prioritizing process. For now, however, rather than continuing to berate the previous administration, officials should do everything in their power to promote use of the Trenton- Camden line. Steps under consideration, Mr. Warrington said, include adjusting bus schedules in the region to serve the trains rather than compete with them; setting up a joint ticket program with Philadelphia area commuter trains; providing free transfers from NJ Transit buses to the trains, and providing free parking at the light-rail stations.
In spite of all the pessimism voiced Tuesday, the line is bound to produce some benefits in the riverfront corridor. The task now is to maximize them.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Monday, September 16, 2002
By TOM HESTER JR.
Long wait ahead. Bumper-to-bumper. Expected delays. Slow moving. Congested.
Such is the grinding, frustrating vocabulary of Route 1 commuting.
But help could be on the way.
A NJ Transit study found a bus rapid transit (BRT) system along Route 1 is viable and recommends further investigation into a high-tech system that would link major work, residential and retail centers from Lawrence to South Brunswick with sleek, modern vehicles.
A complementary study commissioned by the Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association, a local transportation advocacy group, created a general blueprint for such a system and affirmed the conclusion that BRT could be a valuable asset to the area.
"It is only a preliminary study. We haven't yet figured out exactly what the route would be or where the buses would stop," GMTMA Executive Director Sandra Brillhart said. "But we have taken a look at the big picture and it seems like bus rapid transit could be one piece in the puzzle to solve the traffic problem along the Route 1 corridor."
The system, if built, would likely use high-tech vehicles that combine features from traditional buses and light-rail trains.
These vehicles would operate, at least in part, along a specially-built and totally dedicated roadway that would sit a few hundred yards off Route 1, behind Quaker Bridge Mall, Carnegie Center and the other properties that front the highway.
This new roadway, which would not be open to cars, would allow the buses to zip unimpeded through the crowded region while cars sat stuck on Route 1. "It would provide convenient, high-speed service," Brillhart said. "It would get a lot of cars off Route 1."
Despite the advantages of such a new transit system, Route 1 commuters won't be getting out of their cars anytime soon.
The project would likely cost hundreds of millions of dollars and take years to design and build.
"This is not something that's going to happen in a year or two," NJ Transit spokesman Ken Hitchner said of the BRT system.
With the two studies in, the next step is to discuss the BRT plan with the affected municipalities - Lawrence, West Windsor, Plainsboro and South Brunswick - to see whether they will support it.
If NJ Transit and the other major agency behind the BRT initiative, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, get municipal support, they will likely authorize a full-blown feasibility study.
"The timing of all this stuff is up in the air right now. But we will be meeting with NJ Transit in a week to decide how exactly we are going to proceed from here," said Rosemarie Anderson, a senior transportation planner for the DVRPC.
Of course, with tight budgets at the state level, NJ Transit cannot currently finance major new projects, Brillhart said. But, she continued, the federal government has been providing money for BRT systems across the country.
Currently, at least 17 other communities in the United States have implemented the concept.
Typically, BRT is considered an alternative to light-rail trains, although state legislators have discussed building BRT systems to link commuters with the Hudson-Bergen and South Jersey light-rail projects.
Ideally, BRT combines better bus design and ticketing procedures with roadway improvements and high technology.
The first two features allow people to hop on and off buses without lengthy station stops. The second two ensure the buses never get caught up in traffic or stuck behind a light.
The roadway improvements can range from new lanes to new roads. The technology generally involves traffic signals that would give priority to BRT vehicles as well as satellite tracking systems to spot and correct problems.
"For the riders, it would be a high-class kind of service," Brillhart said.
A September 2001 study by the General Accounting Office found BRT showed promise in fighting traffic congestion.
"Bus rapid transit is an emerging approach to using buses as an improved high-speed transit system," the GAO report stated.
At first, NJ Transit analyzed building a light-rail line along Route 1, but found BRT was a better option because it would attract more riders along the corridor.
The study envisioned an alignment extending from near the Route 1-Interstate 295 interchange in Lawrence to Ridge Road in South Brunswick.
It would start at a park-and-ride that would be built in Lawrence near the highway interchange. The lot would hold 900 to 1,100 cars.
The system would have stops at Cyanamid Center, Meadow Road, Carnegie Center, Princeton Junction train station, Sarnoff, FMC, Scudders Mill Road, Forrestal Center and Ridge Road. A spur would link the BRT line with the so-called Dinky train from Princeton Borough.
The analysis assumed running speeds of 40 mph, with an average speed, incorporating stops at stations, of 30 mph.
It estimated 20,100 daily trips on the system in 2020, including 1,300 daily trips from the Princeton Junction train station and 6,000 daily trips from the feeder bus services, mostly from Trenton, Lawrence, Hightstown, East Windsor and New Brunswick.
Half the ridership would take place during rush hours, with 760 peak-hour riders anticipated. NJ Transit criteria indicates projects should carry 600 riders during the peak hour to merit further evaluation.
The next steps involve more detailed study, including the feasibility of land use changes that would be needed to build the system. Hitchner, the NJ Transit spokesman, said the BRT vehicles, for example, would need rights-of-way through properties.
"This bus transit system could work, but there needs to be some land use changes," he said.
NOTE: Staff Writer Andrew D. Smith contributed to this report.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Bus rapid transit the next wave in public transportation
Monday, September 16, 2002
By ANDREW D. SMITH
Forget the slow, smoke-belching vehicles that give bus travel such a bad name.
Instead, imagine buses so high-tech and comfortable, so fast and convenient, so affordable and hip that most people would happily use them.
Imagine a major city where such buses zip through the streets unimpeded by traffic - a city where the bus system makes people willingly give up their cars.
Impossible, you say? Such a system already exists, in a Brazilian city called Curitiba. And its phenomenal success has cities across North America trying to hop aboard the so-called bus rapid transit bandwagon.
"It's really the next wave in public transportation because it can give you something like the speed of rail with much more flexibility and much less cost," said Sandra Brillhart, executive director of the Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association. "I think you're going to see a lot of BRT systems very soon."
Ideally, BRT combines the advantages of trains and buses.
BRT systems use upscale design to overcome the stigma associated with bus travel. And they use double- or triple-long vehicles to increase capacity.
Unlike normal buses, which can sit at stops for minutes as customers struggle up steps and stop to buy tickets, BRT stops rarely exceed 10 seconds.
Why so fast?
BRT customers must pre-purchase their tickets at stations so they don't have to interact with drivers when they board. What's more, each bus features multiple double-wide doors, which open at ground level and allow passengers to avoid the stairs and proceed immediately to their seats.
Once the buses begin moving, BRT systems travel by using dedicated bus lanes, either on existing roads, on specially built paths or (as in Pittsburgh) on abandoned rail lines.
When they travel on normal streets, BRT buses avoid the hassle of traffic lights with special technology that can extend green lights and ensure that BRT buses only stop at stations.
Such features can make BRT lines nearly as fast as train service. But because they use roads rather than rails and because they generally stick to existing rights of way, BRT systems usually cost far less to build.
To demonstrate BRT's potential, supporters point to Curitiba, a city of 2.2 million people that lies 200 miles southwest of Sao Paulo.
More than 30 years ago, Curitiba's mayor - an architect and urban planner named Jamie Lerner - began using dedicated bus lanes to provide residents high- speed public transit at the right price for a city that could not afford to build rails.
As the years went by, the city expanded the system and officials there slowly invented the other features of a BRT system.
Today, Curitiba's system of public transportation may be the best in the world. Curitiba's 1,900 buses make 14,000 trips per day, zipping rapidly down unclogged roads and stopping roughly every half mile.
Over a 24-hour period, buses there carry nearly 2 million riders and accommodate more than 70 percent of all work-related travel.
Smaller shuttle buses connect neighborhoods with the main bus lines, so people can use the system to travel to and from most points in the city.
And because most people choose to ride the bus - passenger satisfaction is around 89 percent - the roads are clear for those who choose to drive.
No other city has achieved anything like Curitiba's success. And no other city, at least no North American city, really has any hope of doing so, agree many mass transit officials across the continent.
North Americans may have more money to spend on high-tech buses and the construction of new roadways, butthey do not have the power to stand up to the continent's car culture.
In Curitiba, the government banned cars from many existing roads in downtown areas where there was no room to build the dedicated lanes the buses need to keep moving. But in Pittsburgh, a city that has a scaled-back form of BRT, no one would dare try to take over downtown streets, said Paul Skoutelas, executive director of the Port Authority of Allegheny County.
Even when cities add new lanes to existing roads to support BRT systems, they have trouble fighting off drivers who lobby elected officials to let cars on those lanes rather than let them sit empty most of the time.
As for holding traffic lights for buses, that too poses some difficult problems.
"During peak times we have buses running every couple minutes. If we gave them absolute priority at lights, traffic crossing the bus route would suffer major delays," said Glen Leicester, director of implementation planning at the Greater Vancouver (British Columbia, Canada) Transportation Authority. "People just wouldn't stand for it."
The power of the driving lobby forces cities like Pittsburgh and Vancouver to scale down the BRT concept - a compromise that often takes the "rapid" out of BRT.
In Vancouver, where a 10-mile BRT line connects the downtown and one of the biggest suburbs, mostly along normal roads, the trip takes around 45 minutes at rush hour. A similar route run along less congested roads with conventional buses took only 50 minutes.
But Leicester reports that riders are pleased with the switch, not only because it reduces travel time by five minutes but also because it operates along major roads and saves them the trouble of walking to secondary roads to catch the bus.
City finance officers appreciate the lower cost.
The BRT system in Vancouver cost around $28.5 million, including enough buses to run every 5 minutes at rush hour. A rail line would have cost between $635 million and $1.27 billion, depending upon how nice a rail line they chose to build.
Of course, train service would have been faster: 35 minutes for the cheaper rail option, 22 minutes for the more expensive one. But it also would have been more expensive to maintain.
Many other municipalities have had much the same problem.
Numbers from six cities that operate both BRT and light rail - Dallas, Denver, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, San Diego and San Jose, Calif., - report the average construction cost per BRT mile ranges from $700,000 to $13.5 million. The average cost per mile for light rail is $34 million. The average operating cost per mile is $3.96 for BRT and $11.74 for light rail.
And what do you get for the extra investment?
According to this study, lesser service. The average operating speed of the BRT systems is 32.2 mph. The average speed of the light rail is 16.8 mph.
Like Vancouver, the city of Ottawa has also opted for BRT. But Ottawa has invested considerably more on dedicated roadways - around $286 million so far - and consequently enjoys much faster bus service.
"It's not Curitiba. Nothing in North America will ever be that complete," said Leicester. "But the system there is very good. It's very convenient and it's nearly as fast as rail."
Closer to home, different cities have used BRT in various ways.
-- The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority is building a project in two phases that will allow buses with low floors and alternative fuels to operate in exclusive lanes on streets and an exclusive bus tunnel. The project is expected to cost $1.34 billion.
-- Charlotte, N.C., opened a 2.6-mile bus expressway in 1998 in exclusive lanes along downtown Independence Boulevard. The project has allowed buses to bypass congestion and increased bus ridership 55 percent, the Charlotte Area Transit System said. Plans are to extend the bus expressway until it is 13.5 miles. The project is being financed with a sales tax approved in a 1998 referendum.
-- Cleveland plans to connect its region's two largest employment centers by building an exclusive bus lane along a landscaped median that would have seven stops. The project is estimated to cost $220 million.
-- Eugene, Ore., plans a two-phased, 10-mile project that calls for exclusive busways, traffic signal priority, prepaid fares and fewer stops along major corridors. Smaller buses are planned from neighborhoods to the major bus lines. The project is estimated to cost $44 million.
-- San Juan, Puerto Rico, plans to build a bus rapid transit system that would connect riders with other transportation facilities. The project includes building new bus lanes and stations and is estimated at $66 million.
Currently, at least 17 other communities in the United States have implemented the concept. And many other locals, like the Route 1 corridor here, are considering BRT systems of their own.
NOTE: Staff Writer Tom Hester Jr. contributed to this report.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Try transit during rideshare month
To the editor:
New data from 2000 Census show that New Jersey residents are living further from work, adding to average drive times. Sprawling building and development patterns in New Jersey are to blame because they leave only one travel option the car.
Throughout the state of New Jersey, 1.6 million people commute to work 30 minutes or more, and 510,919 spend 60 minutes or more on their daily commute. Of those people spending over 30 minutes on the daily commute, over 1.3 million people did not use public transportation. Of all New Jersey commuters, 2.8 million people said that they drive alone to work every day. Rush hour is now becoming rush mornings, and rush afternoons. This decade also saw the start of a midday "lunch rush" as commuters try to run errands and make up for lost time.
The key to this commuting dilemma isn't more roads or even just more transit. Instead, building mixed developments of offices, stores and homes centered around train stations and bus stops could be a way out of this traffic mess. In the meantime, mass transit and ridesharing are our only hope.
The Transportation Management Association Council of New Jersey would like to urge all New Jersey commuters to do their part to reduce traffic congestion and help clean the air. This September, in honor of rideshare month, join a carpool or try transit. Even if it's just one day a week, every bit helps. For more information about local transit and rideshare programs visit www.Driveless.com or call 1-800-245-POOL.
John F. Ciaffone
President
Transportation Management
Association Council of
New Jersey
Roszel Road
West Windsor
More Density Needed to Support Central NJ Rapid Bus Plan
Mobilizing the Region
Tri-State Transportation Campaign
Issue 380 August 26, 2002Bus rapid transit service would be feasible in the Mercer-Middlesex Route 1 corridor only if key municipalities greatly increase employment and residential densities, according to a NJ Transit analysis.
Transit spokespeople told the Central NJ Transportation Forum, a group of civic and municipal leaders, that West Windsor and Plainsboro townships would have to concentrate 26,000 jobs and 2,600 households in areas that would be served by the rapid bus service for it to attract 760 peak hour riders.
The service modeled by NJ Transit would run between Route 1 and the Northeast Corridor rail line from an I-295 park-and-ride in Lawrence to South Brunswick. The main-line busway would be fed by numerous local routes.
It remains to be seen whether the municipalities in the corridor are interested in significantly densifying development in order to support mass transit. Most of the bus rapid transit systems being developed in the United States will operate in urban settings like Boston and Los Angeles, or serve express bus routes from suburbs to central business districts (for instance, the New Britain-Hartford busway - MTR #364).Routes in urban north Jersey not well-served by Newark- and NYC-oriented rail service may be better candidates for rapid bus development than suburban corridors further south.
Another study conducted for the forum found that congestion in the area is likely to worsen despite plans for new roads like Route 92 and the Millstone Bypass, and whether or not transit service in the corridor is augmented.
http://www.tstc.org/bulletin/20020826/mtr38003.htm
Orphaned Northeast Corridor Would be Capital-Starved, Not Self-Supporting
Mobilizing the Region
Tri-State Transportation Campaign
Issue 380 August 26, 2002Common wisdom about passenger rail operations in the U.S. says that trains between Boston and Washington, D.C. pay for themselves, while routes serving the country's interior are "money losers."
However, an analysis in the NY Times last weekend pointed out that Northeast Corridor operating revenues do not cover the line's considerable capital needs. According to the Times, the corridor itself, exclusive of the cost of rolling stock, needs up to $12 billion in improvements.
Some experts say that regardless of the conditions of the Acela trains, deferred track maintenance may soon force northeast trains to reduce speed.
If the Bush administration and Congress lets Amtrak go under, it may be up to the northeast states to pick up this tab and work out the system's problems. The picture of a dozen-odd states negotiating over costs and service schedules is not an inspiring one.
The Acela Express' summer of woe due to technical shortcomings underscores the continuing need for capital investment. It also raises others points. One is that weak investment in rail has eliminated the U.S. train-manufacturing industry. Some point to Acela's technical flaws as the product of strict U.S. standards for crash-worthiness clashing with European design culture that emphasizes the lighter weights needed for high-speed operation.
http://www.tstc.org/bulletin/20020826/mtr38004.htm
Bus rapid transit concept winning support
By: Gwen Runkle , Staff Writer 08/23/2002
Feasibility study due out next month
WEST WINDSOR - The Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association told the township Planning Board on Wednesday it expects to complete a study on the feasibility of a bus rapid transit system for the Princeton area in the next month.
"It's not quite done yet," said Sandra Brillhart, director of the TMA. "But I can safely say we did find that bus rapid transit is feasible, which parallels findings by NJ Transit and the Central Jersey Transportation Forum."
NJ Transit announced the results of its analysis of a proposed bus rapid transit line from Lawrence to South Brunswick at Sarnoff Corp. two weeks ago.
That study, prepared at the request of the Central Jersey Transportation Forum, showed a bus rapid transit line along the Route 1 corridor would meet minimum ridership requirements to be economically feasible and would reduce auto trips in the region.
Ms. Brillhart said the TMA's study looked at the physical, economic and environmental feasibility of a bus rapid transit system using an alignment similar to that used by NJ Transit and is looking to arrange for a road test of a bus rapid transit vehicle next year.
Bus rapid transit is a mass-transit system with vehicles that, like light-rail, operate on exclusive fixed guideways, but also can travel on regular roadways as buses do.
The buses could shift from a "trunk line" of fixed two-way concourses reserved just for bus use to "feeder lines" along regular roadways.
"It takes an old concept, the bus, and finds a way to make it more convenient and faster," said Ruby Siegel, director of planning for SYSTRA Consulting Inc., a company assisting the TMA with its study. "It's flexible and is more attractive because it requires less infrastructure. You don't have to lay down rails or put wires overhead like with light rail."
A bus rapid transit system is of interest to West Windsor because the area is currently choked with commuter traffic. A bus rapid transit system could give the area some breathing room and also serve to better connect township residents with services in and out of the township, municipal officials say.
The township is interested in working with both new and existing developers to make the area more transit-friendly. Sarnoff Corp., for instance, agreed to dedicate right-of-way for a bus rapid transit line in its recently approved general development plan for a 3 million-square-foot technology campus.
The township also is expected to start working soon with Wyeth Inc. to develop the former Cyanamid property, a 640-acre tract bordered by Route 1, Quakerbridge Road and Clarksville Road,which in the NJ Transit study is labeled for a bus rapid transit stop.
"We're at the center of it all," said Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh, "and need to plan carefully. We need to talk with developers to negotiate contributions and donations to the system. I don't expect to use taxpayer money to do this."
©Packet Online 2002
Study calls local freight line a 'choke point'
By: Steve Rauscher , Staff Writer 08/23/2002
Region's rail network said to be deteriorating rapidly
A study commissioned by the I-95 Corridor Coalition has found that the Mid-Atlantic region's freight rail network is deteriorating rapidly and recommended more than $6.2 billion in improvements, including $46 million to double-track the CSX company line between Manville and Trenton.
The study surveyed the five Mid-Atlantic states - Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey - as well as southern New York, in an effort to pinpoint the rail network's "choke points" and develop a strategy to increase its capacity. It paints a picture of a rail network that is overburdened and under-maintained.
"Capacity and congestion problems today are eroding the productivity of the transportation system," the report reads. "Travel time and cost are increasing, service reliability is decreasing, and the ability of the system to recover from emergencies and disruptions is severely taxed."
Experts cite a number of causes for the deterioration, chief among them the shift in transportation spending priorities from rail to roads, and the difficulty of coordinating improvements and sharing costs between states.
"A big part of this study is to get the states to look at this on a consensus basis," I-95 Corridor Coalition President John Baniak said. The coalition comprises a number of public and private transportation interests from East Coast states. "They've got to look beyond what's good and what's a problem within each state."
The problem within the Mid-Atlantic region, according to the report, is the proliferation of substandard bridges, tunnels, grade crossings and connections, as well as areas of limited capacity, that combine to constrain efficient rail passage. The study identifies 71 "choke points" - locations in the network with reduced capacity or operational capabilities compared to the rest of the network - where bottlenecks often occur. Thirteen of the points are in New Jersey, including one along the Trenton-Manville line that passes through Montgomery. The study calls for the construction of another set of tracks along the line, where there is currently just a single set.
The cost of the Manville-Trenton line improvement alone is estimated at $46 million. The cost of the entire improvement from Virginia to New York tops $2.6 billion. Given that most of the infrastructure in question is owned by Amtrak as well as the CSX and Norfolk Southern rail companies, and snakes through six states, finding the money to complete the improvements may be the project's biggest challenge, Mr. Baniak said.
"We have to find a way to find funding on a regional basis," he said. "This study is sort of a first of its kind, and it's at a very early stage."
Micah Rasmussen, a spokesman for the state Department of Transportation, which is one of the member organizations in the coalition, praised the plan but agreed that the funds could prove hard to come by.
"These are intriguing options," he said. "We're interested in extra freight, because it's the only way to get the trucks off the roads, which has been our goal, but it now becomes a question of directing money to specific projects and prioritizing. In an ideal world, we'd have the funding for everything."
Most of the improvements proposed in the state fall in the medium to long-term stages of the overall plan. That means they are not priorities, and are unlikely to be completed within the next decade. Mr. Rasmussen said the state has no active plans to build a second track along the Manville-Trenton line.
That line was once home to Montgomery's Belle Mead train station, which closed in 1982. Township officials have looked at re-opening the station in the past, but passenger service - connecting West Trenton and New York through Manville and Bound Brook - would require the construction of another track, which, again, seems unlikely in the near future.
"With regard to passenger service, I don't want anybody to get ahead of themselves," Mr. Rasmussen said. "It's something that we might do if we had the funds. But right now, that's a big if."
©Packet Online 2002
Transit chief has one-track mind
Sunday, August 11, 2002
By TOM HESTER Jr.
TRENTON - A glitzy, gleaming new train station for the capital city.
A sleek light-rail line coasting through the capital city's downtown to the center of state government - the State House.
A convenient commuter rail line cruising from West Trenton to Somerset County.
All nice ideas.
All very expensive.
George Warrington, NJ Transit's new executive director, doesn't shy away from such ambitious projects.
He just has other priorities right now.
"It's about getting back to basics," Warrington said.
That means improving what NJ Transit already has - tracks, cars, parking, equipment, signals and other aged infrastructure.
"Let's be real," Warrington said. "Let's be smart. Let's be practical about the stuff that matters most."
With 400,000 daily bus and train passengers, NJ Transit is the third-largest mass transit agency in the nation, but the agency is looking at a $2.3 billion deficit in the next five years.
Critics have long complained the agency, a private corporation formed to operate the state's public transportation, neglected aging infrastructure and customer service needs, instead spending too much on projects such as the $600 million Southern New Jersey light-rail line expected to open next year linking Trenton to Camden.
A 2001 Rutgers University study found a decade of underfunding, failure to raise fares and ambitious construction has left NJ Transit with a fiscal crisis that threatens its services.
Warrington, 49, who took over NJ Transit in April after three years leading Amtrak, said he wants to change the mindset.
He isn't afraid to talk of more frequent fare increases.
He wants to focus on service.
It's a goal he repeats often and adamantly when discussing his plans.
"We have to deal with first and fundamentally the existing system," Warrington said. "That's got to be our No. 1 priority - back to basics."
That may not be what local officials want to hear.
Trenton Mayor Douglas H. Palmer has lobbied for years for a rebuilt train station and a light-rail spur to the State House, but Warrington said every part of New Jersey has a preferred mass transit project, all expensive.
"You can't let the system behind you fall apart as you try to be all things to all people," Warrington said.
-- -- --
Gov. James E. McGreevey, when appointing Warrington in March, gave Warrington a mandate to address the agency's numerous problems, from overcrowding on buses and trains to deep financial woes.
"Literally, George will be responsible for making sure the trains run on time," McGreevey said.
Warrington, whose salary is $275,000, $82,000 more than his predecessor, worked various jobs for the state Transportation Department and NJ Transit from 1975 to 1992, leaving as deputy commissioner. He was executive director of the Delaware River Port Authority and Port Authority Transit Corp. from 1992 to 1994, when he joined Amtrak as president of its Northeast Corridor business unit.
He was appointed Amtrak director in 1998, presiding over a long debate about the passenger carrier's worthiness and concerns from lawmakers about whether it would ever be able to earn a profit.
"This is a much more conducive environment," Warrington said of New Jersey. "There's no debate about the benefits of transit."
To keep New Jersey's system from falling apart, Warrington has formed task forces to study capacity, capital improvements, management efficiency, communication and customer service.
Capacity, Warrington said, is key, with some improvements immediately possible.
For example, he said the state's train stations have 100,000 users, but only 50,000 parking spaces. They once had 70,000 spaces. Recently, 260 spaces were added to the Hamilton station, but parking remains cramped.
"We've moved backward in terms of parking cars," Warrington said.
NJ Transit is moving forward on plans to add 29 new electric locomotives that cost $4.7 million apiece but can move more cars. It also plans to add 231 new bi-level cars, with $250 million from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, that can carry 33 percent more passengers than the single-level cars used now, Warrington said.
It added new cars and changed schedules to address overcrowding on trains after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The new $63 million Montclair Connection, which will make direct service to Manhattan available from Upper Montclair, is scheduled to open this fall.
-- -- --
Frederick Kaymann, of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, an organization that monitors local transit, said Warrington's moves to make immediate, common sense improvements show he can be a creative leader.
"We've seen positive results so far," Kaymann said. "If he can continue this track record, we're in for a potential golden age at NJ Transit."
Martin E. Robins, author of the Rutgers study and director of its Transportation Policy Institute, said "a back-to-basics approach is inescapable" for Warrington, even if it isn't trendy.
"Many agencies are seeking funds to start new systems and expand others. NJ Transit's current directions are the result of too many ambitions and too few resources during the Whitman years," he said, referring to Christie Whitman, who was governor from 1994 through January 2001.
Warrington's biggest challenge, and the region's most dire transportation need, Kaymann said, will be improving access to the area's most traveled destination - midtown Manhattan.
Warrington doesn't disagree.
New locomotives, cars and rail lines, he said, will mean little if NJ Transit cannot run more trains into Penn Station in New York, so the principal focus is improving access to Manhattan through new rail tunnels and exclusive bus lanes.
Projects such as reinstituted commuter rail service from West Trenton, in Ewing, to Somerset County will mean little, he said, if trains cannot get into the Big Apple.
"We'd be sort of adding trains to nowhere," Warrington said.
The existing two-track tunnel under the Hudson River was built by the Pennsylvania Railroad in 1910 and is owned by Amtrak.
It carries NJ Transit commuter and Amtrak trains traveling between Boston and Washington.
NJ Transit runs 18 trains through during peak hours, but bottlenecks form and a 1998 study projected the tunnel will be at full capacity by 2020.
Warrington said NJ Transit would like to eventually run 42 trains into New York, but would need a new two-track tunnel under the Hudson and an expanded Penn Station to accomplish that goal. Such a project is estimated to cost as much as $5 billion.
Warrington said such an expensive project will require massive cooperation between the federal and state governments and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
"At some point, we're not going to be able to add any trains until we deal with what I call the pinchpoint - Newark to New York," he said.
-- -- --
While Penn Station has Warrington's focus, Trenton and Mercer County officials have been focused on the Trenton Train Station.
The South Clinton Avenue depot, which serves Amtrak and NJ Transit trains and 4,600 weekday passengers, is considered unworthy of the capital city. The drab, worn building lacks modern amenities. The city wants it rebuilt into a safer, more aesthetically pleasing complex with office, retail and civic space.
Building a new station could cost as much as $45 million. The design has advanced with $7.5 million in federal money and federal legislators are seeking millions more this year. But NJ Transit has budgeted no money.
Warrington said it's a worthy project.
"It should have been rebuilt 10, 15, 20 years ago," he said. "No doubt about it."
But, he added, "It's an expensive project."
Palmer said he understands Warrington's position and NJ Transit's financial woes - and lauded Warrington's performance so far - but said he's hopeful the project will be made a priority when money becomes available. He predicted work will begin within three to four years.
"I believe we're moving ahead," Palmer said.
Steven E. Polzin, director of the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida, said balancing new projects and infrastructure maintenance is a classic transportation debate.
"The bias toward building new is driven by a number of factors, such as the political infatuation with new ribbons to cut," he said.
Despite such pressure, it's wise, Polzin said, to concentrate on what you have.
"The reinvestment in transit infrastructure can have dramatic impacts on transit use and public attitudes," he said. "Reliability and safety are two of the more important considerations in traveler choice and poorly maintained systems show significant deterioration in these areas."
Warrington said the Trenton Train Station project is among many long-awaited projects lacking funding. He said planning for the projects will continue, but lawmakers must decide how New Jersey will allocate annual, stable funding for transportation.
"This is a problem that will not be solved overnight," Warrington said.
Warrington refused to discuss an oft-proposed solution - increasing the state's gasoline tax.
"Policy-makers are clearly going to have to make the right choice about what the right vehicle is," he said.
NJ Transit implemented its first fare increase since 1991 on April 1. Warrington said more fare increases need to be considered. Riders, he said, will understand if it's explained clearly and the increase is reasonable, possibly tied to the inflation rate.
"I think it needs to be simple," he said. "I think it needs to be predictable. I think it needs to be practical."
Kaymann said such thinking is reflective of Warrington's leadership.
"This is a symbol of a really, honest approach, an honest budgetary mindset," Kaymann said. "It's a refreshing new breeze at NJ Transit."
Copyright 2002 The Times
Senator acts to pave way for fuel-cell, no-gas cars
Tuesday, August 06, 2002
BY ANTHONY S. TWYMAN
Star-Ledger StaffOne state senator believes he has seen the future, and it does not include the combustion engine.
In less than 10 years, New Jersey drivers could be operating fuel- cell-powered cars that will be cheaper to run and spew less pollution than traditional gasoline-fueled cars, Sen. Peter Inverso (R- Mercer) predicts.
Inverso said yesterday he plans to introduce a package of bills when the Legislature returns that will hasten that day.
"This is an exciting technology that has the potential to replace gasoline as the way to power cars, making America more energy-independent and pollutant-free," Inverso said yesterday. "We would be foolish to ignore this technology."
Fuel cells produce energy from a chemical reaction that combines hydrogen with oxygen. The byproduct is harmless water vapor.
Inverso's bills would have the state purchase fuel-cell vehicles as part of its fleet of cars and purchase other fuel cell-powered equipment, such as lawn mowers. The bills also would create a 15 to 20 percent corporate business tax credit for companies that purchase fuel-cell vehicles, as well as establish a fuel cell research center at Rutgers University and a legislative commission to study fuel cell-technology.
In New Jersey, Inverso said, the Millennium Cell and H Power companies are already working on developing fuel cells. President Bush's administration also recently announced an agreement with major automakers to accelerate fuel cell- powered vehicles.
Inverso said Ford Motor Co.'s plant in Edison, which the company plans to close in 2004, and the General Motors' plant in Linden, where work is scheduled to be scaled back soon, could be "easily retooled" for work on fuel-cell vehicles, providing jobs to New Jerseyans.
Environmentalists are supporting the package. "It helps ease the introduction of the technology to a broader market," said Dena Mottola, acting director of the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group.
"We support the package," said David Pringle, campaign director for the New Jersey Environmental Federation. "It's a good step forward."
Anthony S. Twyman covers the environment. He can be reached at atwyman@starledger.com or at (609) 989-0322.
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger.
Sunday, July 28, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
One only has to look at how other areas of the country have implemented innovative ideas like bus rapid transit to appreciate how important it is for New Jersey to give top priority to developing its own mass transit systems.
Ours is the nation's most crowded state, yet we have to look to other locales for ways to combat traffic congestion on our highways and to lure people out of their cars.
The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority is building a two-phase project in the Boston area that will allow buses with low floors and alternative-fuel engines to operate in reserved lanes on streets and in a bus-only tunnel. Charlotte, N.C., opened a 2.6-mile bus expressway in 1998 in exclusive lanes along downtown Independence Boulevard, a project that has allowed buses to bypass congestion and has increased transit ridership 55 percent.
Cleveland plans to link its region's two largest employment centers with an exclusive, seven-stop bus lane along a landscaped median. Eugene, Ore., plans a two-phase, 10-mile project that calls for exclusive busways, priority traffic-signal treatment for buses, prepaid fares and fewer stops along major corridors. Smaller vehicles will be used on routes connecting neighborhoods to the major bus lines.
Those are just a few examples. At least 17 communities in the United States have implemented the bus rapid transit concept, which involves improving infrastructure, equipment, operations and technology to give buses preferential treatment and speed not only running time but time spent at bus stops.
A September 2001 study by the General Accounting Office found bus rapid transit to be flexible, efficient and full of promise. Buses suffer from a poor public image, the GAO said, but that could be improved with the use of newer, more attractive vehicles with lower floors and higher speeds.
New Jersey should act on these positive examples and findings. Assemblyman Francis Bodine, R-Mount Laurel, is trying to make that happen. He has sponsored a bill to require NJ Transit to design and implement bus rapid transit demonstration projects that would link outlying park-and-ride lots to the Camden-Trenton and Hudson-Bergen light-rail systems, helping relieve the acute shortage of parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the systems' stations. Unfortunately, his bill so far has no Senate sponsor - a necessity if it is to stand a chance of becoming law - and only lukewarm support from NJ Transit, which should be at the forefront of exploring ideas such as this one.
Effective projects and exciting ideas don't come cheap. Nevertheless, an assured source of funding is available, if the legislators will only accept it: an increase in the gasoline tax. Such a proposal is frightening to politicians in this taxophobic state, but the fact remains that New Jersey's gas tax is one of the lowest in the nation, and directly benefits those who pay it - including many drivers from out of state - by funding not only highways but also mass-transit projects that relieve congestion on those highways.
New Jersey should be a leader in mass-transit innovation and construction. It should begin that leadership now.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Monday, July 22, 2002
By TOM HESTER Jr.
TRENTON - Even before the light-rail line being built between Trenton and Camden opens next spring, state officials are concerned about a problem that seemingly plagues train stations throughout New Jersey - the parking squeeze.
The 34-mile Southern New Jersey Light Rail Transit System is to include 20 stations between the Camden waterfront and the Trenton Train Station.
Park-and-ride facilities are planned for Route 73 south of Palmyra, south of Burlington City and in Florence, and parking lots are planned for the 36th Street, Taylor's Lake and Riverside stops.
Still, parking for light-rail line passengers is a concern because many stops are going to be in small communities with limited room for large parking lots, said Assemblyman Francis Bodine, R-Mount Laurel.
"There are areas that will not be able to provide the parking," he said during a recent Assembly Transportation Committee hearing on legislation he introduced to help solve that problem.
The bill would require NJ Transit to design and implement demonstration projects that would connect the Southern New Jersey light rail and the Hudson-Bergen light rail with what is called bus rapid transit.
At least 17 other communities in the United States have implemented the concept, which involves improving infrastructure, equipment, operations and technology to give buses preferential treatment.
The improvements could include roadways and special lanes set aside exclusively for buses, traffic signals that would give priority to buses and boarding and fare collection improvements to reduce time at bus stops.
Bodine said he sees bus rapid transit being implemented on Route 130, where passengers would be collected from park-and-ride lots and bused to light-rail stations via the bus rapid transit system.
Bodine's bill received unanimous support from the committee but has a long way to make it into law. The bill must be approved by the full Assembly, and the legislation has no Senate sponsor.
Still, Patrick O'Connor of NJ Transit told the committee, the bill would allow the agency to study how best to implement bus rapid transit programs in New Jersey. NJ Transit spokesman Charles Ingoglia said he was unaware of the proposal but said the agency probably has not devised specific plans.
The bill directs NJ Transit to report, within two years of the bill's approval, on the program's benefits and whether additional routes should be established.
It also directs transportation officials to include funding in the budget to pay for it, but doesn't specify an amount.
Transportation advocates supported the concept.
"Bus rapid transit is a great way to extend transit service to underserved communities, particularly in high density urban and suburban areas where business and residential centers are not directly on main travel corridors," said Lisa Peterson, of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.
"Bus rapid transit can provide a fast, one-seat ride to popular destinations, making transit more attractive to potential riders."
A September 2001 study by the General Accounting Office found bus rapid transit showed promise in fighting traffic congestion.
The GAO said rapid bus transit was flexible and efficient. It found buses suffer from a poor public image but stated that could be improved by newer, more attractive buses with low floors and higher speeds.
"Bus rapid transit is an emerging approach to using buses as an improved high-speed transit system," the GAO report stated. "By employing innovative technologies, such as signal prioritization, better stations or shelters, fewer stops and faster service on more attractive vehicles, bus rapid transit shows promise in meeting a variety of transit needs."
Many of the nation's bus rapid transit systems are supported by federal funding, although the money from the Federal Transportation Administration typically is used only for planning and sharing information.
Communities have used bus rapid transit in various ways. Some examples include:
-- The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority around Boston is building a two-phased project that will allow buses with low floors and alternative fuels to operate in exclusive lanes on streets and an exclusive bus tunnel. The project is expected to cost $1.34 billion.
-- Charlotte opened a 2.6-mile bus expressway in 1998 in exclusive lanes along downtown Independence Boulevard. The project has allowed buses to bypass congestion and increased bus ridership 55 percent, the Charlotte Area Transit System said. Plans are to extend the bus expressway until it is 13.5 miles. The project is being financed with a sales tax approved in a 1998 referendum.
-- Cleveland plans to connect its region's two largest employment centers by building an exclusive bus lane along a landscaped median that would have seven stops. The project is estimated to cost $220 million.
-- Eugene, Ore., plans a two-phased, 10-mile project that calls for exclusive busways, traffic signal priority, prepaid fares and fewer stops along major corridors. Smaller buses are planned from neighborhoods to the major bus lines. The project is estimated to cost $44 million.
-- San Juan, Puerto Rico, plans to build a bus rapid transit system that would connect riders with other transportation facilities. The project includes building new bus lanes and stations and is estimated at $66 million.
While NJ Transit has not developed exact plans yet, it's doubtful its demonstration projects, if authorized, would include amenities such as new tunnels and highways exclusively for buses. O'Connor told the committee he envisions a shuttle bus-type service to the light-rail lines.
Peterson said the campaign supports bus rapid transit in general but is uncertain if the locations mentioned in the bill are best for a pilot program in New Jersey. She said the campaign would do more research on what may be the best routes for the state to start a demonstration project.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Study Lists Mass Transit Benefits
A Trip Uses Half the Fuel of One in Private Car, Industry ReportsBy Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 17, 2002; Page B05The fastest and most effective way to reduce air pollution and dependence on foreign oil is to get more people out of cars and onto trains or buses, according to a new study released today by the transit industry.
The study, written by economists from the Brookings Institution and American Enterprise Institute and funded by the American Public Transportation Association, is the first scientific analysis that compares mass transit with private vehicles in terms of the fuel they burn and the pollution they spew.
"Everybody's got an intuition that public transit uses less energy and produces less pollution than private vehicles," said Robert J. Shapiro, an economist and fellow at Brookings. "I don't know of any previous study that has actually quantified it. The environmental advantages are really very striking because they're so great."
For every passenger mile traveled, public transportation uses about half the fuel of private automobiles, sport-utility vehicles and light trucks, the study found. Private vehicles emit about 95 percent more carbon monoxide, 92 percent more volatile organic compounds and about twice as much carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide than public vehicles for every passenger mile traveled, it said.
Those conclusions have particular significance for Washington, one of 16 major cities in violation of federal clean-air standards. The region produces too much nitrogen oxide, which mixes with sunlight to produce unhealthful levels of ground-level ozone. Local leaders must find ways to cut pollution or the region risks losing millions of dollars in federal transportation funding.
The study's authors say that if people in the Washington region used transit for 7 percent of their daily trips, it would make a significant difference in air quality and help the region meet federal standards. Residents in the Washington region now use transit for about 4.5 percent of all daily trips, a rate four times the national average, according to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
"I'm perfectly willing to accept that if you can make those changes, you'd get substantial impact on energy consumption and emissions," said Ronald F. Kirby, chief transportation planner for the council. "The question is, how do you make that happen?"
Transportation association President William Millar said the answer is more public investment in transit and land-use policies that connect jobs and homes to transit. "If it's convenient and you make transit available, people will use it," he said. The association will use the study as it lobbies for more transit funding when Congress reauthorizes the country's transportation spending plan next year, Millar said.
Highway lobbyists dismissed the study as fanciful, saying that mass transit has limited appeal for most people.
"If everyone had wings, we wouldn't need roads or mass transit," said Bob Chase, of the Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance. "The same is true if everyone telecommuted or was placed under house arrest. . . . I don't think it's realistic to think that is the key to solving the air quality problem in this area. It's not convenient, not viable for most people."
And if people suddenly opted to forgo their automobiles and start riding transit, local systems couldn't handle the load, said Lon Anderson, of the American Automobile Association.
"Right now, Metro is having to grapple with how to handle the crowds they have," he said. "They've got too many people in too few cars. If we suddenly had tens of thousands of additional people decide they want to take Metro tomorrow morning, we'd be in a pickle. These are great things to say. The reality is, we couldn't do them anyway."
© 2002 The Washington Post Company
NY Times Letter to the Editor, June 20, 2002
To the Editor:
David Gergen's call for national purpose and public service (Op-Ed, June 17) puts a spotlight on the Bush administration's vacuum in this area. However, one item is notably missing in Mr. Gergen's list of actions that citizens can perform to make our nation better, and thus stronger; that is a vigorous call, backed by tangible incentives and disincentives, for energy conservation.
There are, for example, an increasing number of large S.U.V.'s on the road, but little understanding or concern about the link between this symbol of high energy consumption and its political and environmental costs.
Leadership from the president in energy conservation could make a very large difference in the course of events, including in the air we breathe.
GRACE L. SINDEN
Princeton, N.J., June 17, 2002
Wednesday, June 12, 2002
By HARRY BLAZE
There appears to be a number of "givens" when it comes to passenger rail service in these United States.
-- 1. Amtrak's Northeast Corridor, although praised as one of the most successful passenger service railroads in the country, runs at a deficit.
-- 2. Not surprisingly, the entire Amtrak system operates at a huge deficit.
-- 3. Private railroads bailed out on passengers decades ago, well aware that running passenger trains is a red-ink business.
-- 4. No commuter lines - including New Jersey Transit - break even, let alone show a profit.
-- 5. On the other hand, individual airlines make money, but the publicly financed airports spread across the nation do not now and never did turn a profit.
Considering the soaring costs of increasing security demands at these monuments to the airline industry, it's unlikely they ever will operate at a profit. To our friends in the nation's capital, that seems perfectly normal.
But those same friends in Washington (well, at least they're our pals when they want our votes) keep mumbling about the high cost of keeping Amtrak going.
There even is a demand that Amtrak "pay its own way." Congress, in what appears to be a fit of pique, gave Amtrak until December to become self-sufficient.
That nonsensical idea is a strong indication of Washington's dislike of railroads.
Perhaps this dislike is understandable.
Why spend money on railroads? It can be spent far more "wisely" on airport improvements, highways, bridges, military contracts, "porkbarrel" projects in the politicians' election districts and millions upon millions of foreign aid dollars for countries that hate us.
It appears that most congressmen, senators and sundry other government nabobs and political hacks rarely travel by train. They prefer the alleged `'convenience" of air travel. For some reason or other the politicians, nabobs and hacks don't seem to have to put up with the same airport hassles faced by we mere mortals.
I suppose it's just a coincidence, but unlike the airlines' and the truckers' lobby and the private bus line operators, Amtrak does not contribute to political funds.
Having lost a rail-friendly guy when George Warrington departed Amtrak's top job, some of us train-watchers hoped the rail service's new president, David L. Gunn, would find a way to improve Washington's opinion of Amtrak.
But Gunn came to town sounding like just another enemy, talking about closing down the whole shebang if Uncle Sammy doesn't cough up more money. Well, maybe it takes a two-by-four over the head of Congress to get the attention of our elected officials.
As usual, Congress underfinanced the rail system in the last budget and Amtrak appears to be hanging on by its fingernails.
A recent New York Times article suggested the airlines aren't happy that so many of its would-be customers have found other ways to get where they want to go. That includes Amtrak.
It noted that Amtrak's annual subsidy request is equal to a short stretch of highway or a single runway at an airport.
One of the things only occasionally pointed out in the Amtrak debate is that while congressmen don't want to allocate money for Amtrak, they want train service in their election districts - no matter how unlikely it is that such rail service will come near to breaking even.
The same article quoted a hotel executive, Jurgen Bartels of Meridien Hotels and Resorts, as saying the United States, "can simply no longer justify the economic costs and lost productivity of traveling short distances by air."
Since our highways are unbelievably clogged - loaded with cars, trucks and buses and plagued with crashes - the alternative seems to be the passenger train.
There are lots of proposals for rail service in various places, even for tying rail and air services together (like Newark Airport's link to the Northeast Corridor). I'm just hoping Amtrak can keep scratching and scraping for a living until our friends in the District of Columbia get over their Beltway mentality.
NOTE: Harry Blaze, an assistant metro editor at The Times who also is a rail fan, lives in Hamilton.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Sunday, June 02, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
Rail commuters to New York have received good news, something that has been scarce lately. Even before last Sept. 11, some 3,500 riders were forced to stand on NJ Transit trains each day to and from New York. With PATH service to lower Manhattan lost because of the terrorist attack, that number jumped to 19,000. Later, NJ Transit implemented some scheduling changes that provided thousands of extra seats on trains serving New York. Now Gov. James E. McGreevey and NJ Transit have unveiled a plan to add more cars to existing NJ Transit and Amtrak Clocker trains and, in September, to add two new trains to both the morning and evening rush hours on the Northeast Corridor and North Jersey Coast Line - moves which they say will generate seats for all commuters and eliminate the standing-room-only situation.
Rail passenger advocates, an understandably skeptical lot, say they'll believe the crunch is over when they see it. And the newly announced steps represent only a small fraction of what's needed to make mass transit in New Jersey a practical and appealing option for all the state's travelers. But at least it's moving us in the right direction.
Copyright 2002 The Times
Thursday, May 30, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
Congestion. Jammed. Delayed. Twenty-minute wait at the tolls. Police department activity. Rubber-necking. Disabled vehicle in the right lane.
Ah, the not-so-sweet language of New Jersey rush hour.
From Our Advertisers
Take a look at Route 1, and at the backups at the exits off the interstates, during the morning and evening periods of heaviest use. What you see is a commuting nightmare.
Solutions aren't easily found. They require foresight. They require hard-to-obtain cooperation between government agencies, private businesses and citizens enamored of their cars. Most of all, they require money.
We're not talking about spare change. We're talking about millions - if not billions - of taxpayer dollars.
If the state of New Jersey had that kind of money, it could take great steps to improve area transportation. Exciting, meaningful plans do exist.
A proposal to extend the South Jersey light rail line, now under construction, from the Trenton train station through the city to the State House recently received approval from environmental officials.
The spur would be designed to allow for extensions to Ewing and Hopewell townships, with the New Jersey Department of Transportation, the Merrill Lynch complex and Trenton Mercer Airport as possible destinations. A line into Ewing could link with the West Trenton train station, which is served by SEPTA.
NJ Transit, however, hasn't funded the basic proposed extension - to the State House - or even publicly estimated how much the project would cost. While it surely would be a valuable project and a major transportation improvement, it also would surely be extremely expensive.
As a separate undertaking, NJ Transit is considering reinstituting train service on the old Reading line from West Trenton to Somerset County, which could cost as much as $125 million.
These projects alone would vastly improve mobility in this area, offering new options that would take cars off the roads and would open business opportunities. Unfortunately, they would cost more money than any agency has available.
That's why New Jersey needs to begin putting intense emphasis on mass transit, rather than merely doing piecemeal road projects here and there that improve an intersection or two for a few years. Such projects have their place, but what's needed are far-sighted, visionary plans that are doable and significant.
A secure funding source is a must. Despite the fact that NJ Transit fares were increased 10 percent last month, additional fare hikes shouldn't be ruled out. At one point, former Gov. Christie Whitman proposed a modest increase in the gasoline tax, but the Legislature balked, and Gov. James E. McGreevey has yet to embrace the idea. Nevertheless, a higher gas tax is an eminently sensible way to pay for transportation, including mass transit improvements that benefit everyone - motorists as well as transit customers. It's politically realistic, as well; New Jersey's present tax on gasoline is among the lowest in the nation, and a substantial part of it is paid by out-of-staters using the New Jersey "corridor."
Mass transit needs to be a priority, and it's time New Jersey's political leaders made it such. If they had done so decades ago, today's transportation problems would be much more manageable.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Ride's electric - but price is a shock
By: Steve Rauscher, Staff Writer May 03, 2002
A new model of hybrid electric bus was previewed by area shuttle service providers Wednesday.
It is powered by a turbine engine, but it redlines approaching 40 miles per hour.
What is it?
It's a new model of hybrid electric bus that area shuttle service providers sneaked into service Wednesday.
"This is so people can try out electric buses and see that some of the myths about them are just that: myths," executive director of the Mercer County Transportation Management Association Sandra Brillhart said. "People think that they can't go very far, and it's just not true anymore."
The TMA worked in conjunction with the East Coast Hybrid Consortium and A-1 Limousine Co. on Wednesday to showcase the hybrid bus. On that day it replaced A-1's diesel shuttle buses between the Princeton Junction train station and the Merrill Lynch complex on Roszel Road in West Windsor. The bus, an AVS-22, manufactured by Advanced Vehicle Systems in Chattanooga, Tenn., completed the roughly 1-mile round trip seven times in about four minutes per leg, Ms. Brillhart said.
While the AVS-22 is a hybrid, it is powered differently from the hybrid cars one sees on the road from time to time, AVS engineer Kirk Shore said. Those cars, such as the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight, have both a gasoline-powered engine and an electric motor. The gas motor provides power during acceleration and at higher speeds, while the electric motor provides power at lower speeds. The electric motor's batteries are then partly recharged during braking.
The AVS-22, on the other hand, is propelled exclusively by an electric motor, powered by a battery that is recharged by a small turbine engine about the size of a beer keg, Mr. Shore said. Once the electric engine has drawn down the battery's capacity to 60 percent, the turbine engine kicks in, turning a generator and providing a fresh flow of energy. The turbine in the AVS-22 in use Wednesday runs on diesel fuel, Mr. Shore said, but because the turbine is capable of operating at very high temperatures it can run on renewable fuel sources such as vegetable oil.
"It'll run on French fry grease if you want it to," he said. "It'll run on just about anything that burns."
Because the combustion of diesel fuel is at such a high temperature, about 1,100 degrees, about 98 percent of the fuel is consumed, Mr. Shore said. The ultra-low emission bus has a fuel efficiency of about 5 to 10 miles per gallon. A diesel internal combustion engine, by contrast, achieves combustion temperatures of about 300 to 400 degrees, and provides a similar vehicle about 2 to 5 miles per gallon. Electric engines, he said, are also extraordinarily quiet.
"I would think this is something we're looking at as a viable alternative in the very near future," Ms. Brillhart said. "We'd like to see some service providers actually purchase these buses and put them to use."
But low emissions and quiet come at a very high price. Jeffrey Starr, senior vice president at A-1 Limousine, said the diesel buses his company runs on the train station route cost $75,000 to $125,000. The AVS-22 costs $250,000, and Mr. Starr said that, while his company is committed to "putting a cleaner vehicle on the road," the AVS-22 may not be the answer.
The high cost, he allowed, was partially a function of the low-production run at Advanced Vehicle Systems. Because of the lack of demand for the vehicle, the company is unable to take advantage of the economies of scale available to companies with higher output.
"The trick here is that, to sell more buses, they need to charge a lower price. But, to charge a lower price, they need to sell more buses," he said.
The AVS-22, with a top speed of 40 mph, also lacks the versatility that would make its purchase economical, he said. A bus that can't go on the highway is of limited use.
A-1 Limousine may turn to federal and state government transportation agencies in order to secure funding to purchase the vehicles, Mr. Starr said.
"That would help a lot, no doubt about it," he said.
Until then, Mr. Starr said, the diesel buses his company uses now are relatively new and contain technology that allows them to operate at 95 to 98 percent efficiency.
"That's not zero-emissions," he said, "but it's not bad."
©Packet Online 2002
Car sharing spreading across country
KAREN GAUDETTE, Associated Press Writer Saturday, April 13, 2002
(04-13) 11:28 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --
It's a cinch for Kyle Minor to find a bus, hail a cab or jump on lightrail in his bustling neighborhood. The trouble is finding a parking spot, which is why he's gone carless for the past four years.
But there always were pesky tasks tough to accomplish without a car, like hauling a Christmas tree or lugging bags of groceries. So Minor, who works in the city opera's box office, jumped at the chance to share a car with his fellow San Francisco Bay area residents.
"I think it's fantastic," said Minor, recalling trips to Napa Valley wineries, days he's moved heavy furniture and big shopping trips. "We've been extremely happy and we've used the cars to go all over the place."
Minor is one of thousands of Americans who are sharing cars through services hitting the streets in cities including New York, Seattle, Chicago and Boulder, Colo.
In San Francisco, members of City Carshare pay $30 to join, put down a $300 deposit in case of damage to the car and spend $3.50 per hour (no more than $35 per day) and 37 cents per mile. There's a minimum one-hour charge.
All members receive an electronic key card and a gas card. When they need a car, they reserve timeslots online or over the phone, and walk or use mass transit to get to the many spots throughout the city where the cars, station wagons, Beetles and sedans, are parked. Their key cards gets them in the cars at the right place, at their appointed hour. Using radio technology, carshare office workers make sure cars get returned on time at the right place.
The concept has generated more interest than car sharing cheerleaders expected, prompting them to add more vehicles and expand into new cities with the help of federal transportation grants, seed money from eager communities and city-subsidized parking spots, often near transit hubs.
It appears it could be profitable, too. Robin Chase, chief executive of Cambridge, Mass.-based Zipcar Inc. said her company broke even after three years and has expanded from Boston to Manhattan and Washington, D.C. with 5,000 members sharing 136 cars.
Chase said she was inspired to launch the service when she realized it was exactly what she needed -- to have an extra car to run her family's errands without having to buy, license, fuel and insurance.
San Francisco's nonprofit City Carshare first offered its fleet of 12 lime-green Volkswagen Beetles last spring, expecting 500 members. Now there are 45 cars, 1,400 members and the service has spread across the Bay to Oakland and Berkeley, said Annie Bourdon, the group's outreach coordinator. The cars, which are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, are currently used about seven to nine hours a day, according to Carshare.
Bourdon credits the enthusiasm of customers such as Barbara King, a registered nurse visiting from London staying with family in San Francisco. Buying, leasing or renting a car for three months seemed financially impractical, King said. Sharing a car has become the ideal solution.
"I think that if I lived in San Francisco again I would consider doing this rather than owning a car," King said after she crossed the Golden Gate Bridge in a Beetle to visit a friend.
Car sharing groups aren't seeking to replace buses, trains and other forms of mass transit, leaders say.
Rather, the goal is to make it possible for urban dwellers to get where they're going without having to own a car, which is why several of the services offer discounted rates and insurance with car rental companies so members can save if they plan extended drives.
"Our mission is to provide a convenient and affordable alternative to car ownership," Bourdon said. "Urban space is so sacred and it's a shame it all goes to parking."
The organization cleans and maintains the cars and provides full insurance coverage -- which Bourdon said tops $400 per month per car, the organization's largest expense. The prices are comparable to other groups across the country.
Not everyone is meant to share cars, the groups say. Most reject customers who have had been arrested for drunk or reckless driving, or have had several moving violations. Members are expected to respect the vehicles and return them with gas left in the tank for the next person, to call if stuck in traffic so the next person has time to reach a different car.
"Car rental is a totally different ballgame because everybody can do it and everybody who's driving really does believe they're never going to see this car again," Chase said. "We have something like a third of the damage that car rentals see because people are thinking this is their own car, it's that exact one you're going to see tomorrow.
Copyright San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner 2002
Friday, April 12, 2002
George Warrington talked the right talk when he was hired as executive director of NJ Transit. He promised to focus on customer service and said he would combat overcrowding, streamline the budget and make other improvements.
But no goal will be more challenging than finding the cash to do this job right. It costs money to expand the number of seats, operate new services and keep trains and buses operating reliably.
Warrington needs a stable and predictable stream of dollars. State appropriations can bounce up and down like a yo- yo, making it impossible to plan and carry out work with any certainty.
Finding a stable source of new money won't be easy with Trenton and Washington facing budget pressures. Warrington will have to fight hard in the state and national capitals. But he also needs to take NJ Transit's case to the people of the state.
State residents, not just transit riders, are the ones who will end up picking up the tab. Any new funding scheme is almost certain to include some increase in the state's 10.5-cent gasoline tax.
An increase is justified. We have the third-lowest gas tax in the nation, behind only Georgia and Alaska, and we have some of the nation's most pressing transportation needs.
A gas tax increase should be dedicated strictly to transportation, and it will have to help the highways and bridges as well as mass transit. But a serious chunk of it should be reserved for NJ Transit's needs. Better transit benefits everyone, including drivers. More people on buses and trains mean fewer cars on our congested highways.
Train and bus fare hikes alone don't produce enough money. The 10 percent fare increase that took effect last week will provide about $38 million in additional yearly revenue for NJ Transit. That's little help given the $3.1 billion deficit projected for the agency over the next five years.
To make NJ's Transit's case, Warrington will have to carry through on his plan for a thorough review and streamlining of the agency's budget. He also must make the tough decisions that balance the need for expansion of the rail, light-rail and bus systems with the very real limits on public money.
It won't be easy, and Warrington will need help. Gov. James E. McGreevey should name a bipartisan commission of citizens, legislators and experts to look at what can be built, what must wait and where we can seek new money.
New Jersey is a crowded state, and every resident has an interest in the health of our mass transit system. Warrington and a bipartisan study commission can help build a consensus for the transit we need at a cost we can afford.
Copyright 2002 The Star-Ledger.
Sunday, April 07, 2002
BY EDITORIAL
New Jersey needs to face up to two facts. One: In the nation's most crowded state, a modern, comprehensive network of roads, bridges and mass transit lines is essential to the economy and the residents' quality of life. Two: Such a network costs money.
It would be reassuring if the McGreevey administration were preparing the public to deal with those realities. Unfortunately, it isn't.
The state Transportation Trust Fund is running dry. Federal highway dollars earmarked for New Jersey are ready to go elsewhere unless the state matches them. But the administration has yet to offer a plan for replenishing the trust fund and reviving the flagging capital improvements program. Lisa Peterson of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign complained last week that the federal government, not the state, is responsible for the additional $60 million that will be spent this year to fix bridges, and that the state actually is making its smallest financial contribution in several years to bridge repairs.
James Fox, the state transportation commissioner, is uttering the right words. He says there should be a far greater financial commitment to maintaining the state's bridges and highways. ``We are going to be working with the Legislature to guarantee that the state has the resources necessary,'' he said.
Nevertheless, Mr. Fox again declined to commit the administration to supporting a moderate increase in the state gasoline tax, one of the lowest in the nation, to pay for transportation. Understandably, he has no desire to get out in front of his boss, Gov. James E. McGreevey, who has failed to support a gas tax hike or to propose a reasonable alternative.
In a similar vein, the administration shrinks from the very idea of increasing NJ Transit fares beyond the 10 percent hike - the first in more than a decade - that took effect last week. For a while, Mr. Fox even seemed to be repudiating the automatic cost-of-living adjustments in train and bus fares that already have been approved for the next five years. Later, a DOT spokesman said the commissioner was merely ruling out any further fare increases this year.
No doubt there are ways to spend New Jersey's currently available transportation money in a wiser and more effective manner. Still, if the state's highways, buses and trains are to do an effective job of moving people in the next decade, its politicians will have to think the unthinkable: augmented resources through tax hikes and fare hikes that are adequate to meet the challenge.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
Proposal for Princeton jitney service hits rough road
Thursday, April 04, 2002
By ROBERT STERN
PRINCETON BOROUGH - A jitney service to move people along the Witherspoon Street corridor and around the John-Witherspoon neighborhood might be too costly to be practical.
However, setting up a private funding source to encourage more local residents to buy overcrowded or squalid rental properties from absentee landlords in the John-Witherspoon neighborhood could be one sensible option for that part of town.
Those were among the ideas urban planner Robert Brown discussed with borough officials during Tuesday night's borough council meeting, which sought to address conceptual improvements to the Witherspoon Street corridor.
Brown has been working for the nonprofit citizens' group Princeton Future, which aims to help steer downtown and neighborhood development here based on the community's desires and needs.
Brown's presentation to the council Tuesday night was largely based on recent discussions between Princeton Future and dozens of residents and business owners along the Witherspoon Street corridor.
No concrete plan was expected to arise immediately from the meeting.
But Brown and borough officials highlighted some of the planning issues unique to the Witherspoon Street area.
For example, longtime residents of the historically black John-Witherspoon neighborhood - the borough's most densely populated area - don't want to see the character of their corner of town change, Brown said.
But they have expressed a desire as recently as last month for further steps to be taken against landlords who disregard the borough's overcrowding and quality-of-life ordinances, he said.
At the same time, some residents have told Princeton Future that focusing on the blighted, overcrowded properties in the neighborhood casts an unfair negative image on all its residents.
Borough officials are under constant pressure from developers who want local zoning laws changed so new housing, storefronts and office space could be packed into smaller and smaller spaces along the Witherspoon Street corridor, Mayor Marvin Reed said.
``We're facing enormous pressure . . . to increase the FAR (floor-to-area-ratio) and the number of units for multifamily housing and the number of commercial businesses that would be allowed,'' Reed said.
It's not uncommon to see three-unit residential properties in the Witherspoon area listed for sale for $950,000, he said.
``It means that whatever is sold or built will be resold or rented at a much higher price than what has been the prevailing (rate) in the neighborhood,'' Reed said.
And that's another thing John-Witherspoon residents don't want to see - continued gentrification of their neighborhood, Council President Mildred Trotman said.
But Councilman David Goldfarb cautioned against casting any outside development interest in that neighborhood in a negative light.
``I'm afraid we're using the word gentrification a little too broadly,'' he said. ``I don't think we should be encouraging the neighborhood to aspire to shabbiness'' to stave off wealthy outside investors from buying property there.
Brown said someone recently raised the prospect that a jitney service might be useful for the crowded Witherspoon Street corridor.
But its cost - about $1 million per year - might put it out of reach right now, he and borough officials said.
For now, street and sidewalk improvements for Witherspoon Street - a major road construction project the borough plans to start in the next couple of years - remain the likeliest major changes that the Witherspoon Street corridor will see.
But Princeton Future officials said they will continue fine-tuning their ideas so they might evolve into more concrete plans.
Copyright 2002 The Times.
More Riders, and More Losses on Amtrak
By MATTHEW L. WALD
March 10, 2002
WASHINGTON -- IN the dramatic endings to silent movies, the heroine was tied to the railroad tracks by the villain, with the audience wondering if the hero would arrive in time to save her. In real life these days, it is the oncoming train that is on the brink, waiting for a miraculous rescue.
Amtrak is facing a December deadline, established five years ago, to make enough money to cover its operating expenses. It was making uncertain progress toward that goal before Sept. 11, but the terrorist attacks wrecked all previous plans. Now more people are riding the trains, especially the profitable ones in the Northeast Corridor, the Washington-New York-Boston stretch that is its most popular, so revenues are up, but expenses are up even more, so losses are reaching record levels.
Facing a loss of financing, Amtrak, which must give 180 days' notice before canceling long-distance trains, said it would do so on March 29, allowing it to shut down much of its operations outside the Northeast Corridor if Congress does not give it new funds for the federal fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. But Amtrak is still taking reservations for those trains and clearly hopes that it will receive the $1.2 billion it is asking for, plus a multiyear commitment for more.
The railroad argues it is doing well; ridership was up 4.5 percent in January from the same period a year earlier, to 1.76 million, and ticket revenues were up 12.4 percent, to $96.7 million. A major factor in the increased revenues was the Northeast Corridor, where the new Acela Express carries a premium price. Meanwhile, airlines' ridership and revenues are down, part of a recession in travel resulting from the weak economy and the aftermath of Sept. 11. In the Northeast Corridor, which accounts for two-thirds of Amtrak's ridership and revenues, business is up sharply, from 212,000 riders in September to 266,000 in December. The reason is new, faster and more comfortable equipment, and travelers' avoiding flying, either for safety reasons or because of security delays.
The improvement is clear in market share. From Washington to New York, Amtrak said it now carries 52 percent of the combined rail-air traffic, up from 42 percent a year and a half ago. From New York to Boston it carries 31 percent, up from 18 percent in mid-1999.
And its long-distance sleeper cars are often sold out, as business travelers on routes like New York to Chicago or Washington to Atlanta snap them up.
But according to Amtrak, the net effect of terrorism has been negative, with expenses for security more than eating up the increased revenue.
Although it has lost money every year since it began in 1971, this year was supposed to be different. Five years ago, in the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act, Congress set Dec. 2, 2002, as a drop-dead date for Amtrak to break even on its operating costs. An Amtrak Reform Council was set up under the Act and has now drawn up plans for restructuring the railroad because of its failure to reach "operational self-sufficiency." The council called for peeling off the Northeast Corridor and having a new Amtrak management agency take bids from private operating companies, perhaps state agencies or freight railroads, to run long-distance trains elsewhere in the system, with more financial support from the states. Amtrak itself could bid against private entities.
One result would be to break existing labor contracts. Another would be to eliminate subsidies that some critics say flow among Amtrak's various activities, which include commuter rail services, profitable corridor trains and the long-distance trains. These ideas have drawn opposition from organized labor and rural interests.
Responding to the Reform Council's proposals for a breakup of Amtrak, the National Association of Railroad Passengers, an advocacy group, said in a statement, "the fundamental problem facing passenger rail today is that the federal government spends $13 billion a year on aviation, $33 billion on highways, and only about $570 million on passenger rail."
"'Operational self-sufficiency' is not an appropriate 'life or death' target for passenger rail," said the group, which argues that relying on states for more subsidies is not realistic as state budgets slide into the red.
The Amtrak Reform Council, on the other hand, argued that the problem was not lack of support but Amtrak management. "All we're doing with our subsidies is subsidizing excessive costs," said Wendell Cox, one member of the council, at a meeting on Feb. 7 where its report was released.
Amtrak itself says the problem is that it is encouraged by Congress to run unprofitable trains, without commensurate resources. "The status quo has proved itself unsustainable," the railroad said in a report to Congress last month.
Amtrak is clearly near the end of its financial tether. Last year it mortgaged parts of Penn Station to raise $300 million. But the railroad and its supporters are hopeful that the changed atmosphere since the terrorist attacks may be good for Amtrak. As George Warrington, Amtrak's president, pointed out in the January issue of Arrive, the sleek magazine found on every seat of the new Acela Express, those attacks make a case for transportation diversity.
"The events of Sept. 11th demonstrated the need for a more balanced national transportation system," he wrote. "We expect to play a critical role in the nation's transportation infrastructure for years to come."
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
Parking space push runs counter to urban wisdom
Most cities seeking ways to limit traffic
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Marcia Myers
Sun Staff
Originally published February 23, 2002
The Boston suburb of Cambridge is an example of particularly successful use of transit incentives and parking controls. Four years ago, city leaders there passed a law to discourage people from driving their cars into town. Today, the only way companies in Cambridge can build or expand a parking lot is by offering employees enticing reasons not to use it.They chip in on bus and train tickets for their workers. Some run shuttles between transit stops and offices or pay cash to employees who don't use a parking space. Others have added locker rooms and showers to attract cyclists. Telecommuting programs are growing. Tax incentives help make it all affordable.
"We try to reach everyone, not just the companies required to comply," said Catherine Preston, who oversees the Cambridge program. "There have definitely been companies that have taken this on and championed it, that have not only met the goals but have done better without having to strong-arm employees."
Copyright © 2002, The Baltimore Sun
February 19, 2002, Editorial
The nation's highway system does not make a profit. Nor does the commercial aviation system. Nor does passenger rail. However, only one of these three vital links in America's transportation network, the railroad, is being asked to break even. Congress must abandon its fantasy that Amtrak can be self-sufficient. Only then can it engage in an honest debate about the kind of passenger rail system the country needs, and how to pay for it.
In 1997, in exchange for meager subsidies, Congress required that Amtrak be "operationally self-sufficient" by December of this year, or else. It is "or else" time, and the Amtrak Reform Council, created by the same law, is calling for radical restructuring. The council suggests that Amtrak be broken up into a regulatory agency, a regional body to assume ownership of the Northeast corridor track and an operating company. It would also like to open up certain routes to private competitors.
The council raises valid questions about Amtrak's accountability under the current arrangement, but new bureaucracies and privatization are not necessarily the solution. The fundamental problem undermining the nation's rail system, after all, is chronic underinvestment.
Ever since Congress created it in 1970 to allow private carriers to focus on hauling freight, Amtrak has been asked to do too much with too little. Amtrak's biggest financial burdens - the council calls them unfunded mandates - are long-haul trains and maintenance of the Northeast corridor. Amtrak's operating loss in 2001 was $1.1 billion, its largest ever. Long-distance overnight trains carrying 18 percent of all riders account for 75 percent of its loss. Meanwhile, not enough is being invested to upgrade antiquated infrastructure along the shorter, densely traveled corridors where trains make both economic and environmental sense.
Congress and the public need to start thinking of fast, reliable trains that can link major cities in three hours or less as a key part of the overall transportation system's future. Once that happens, the roughly $3 billion a year needed over the next two decades to develop these high-speed corridors across the country will seem like a bargain, particularly when compared with what taxpayers spend on aviation and highways.
After Sept. 11, ridership levels soared by 40 percent along the Northeast corridor, where Amtrak trains do make an operating profit. Still, antiquated infrastructure means that the new high- speed Acela trains are unable to run at their optimal, 150-mile-an-hour speed for most of their journey from Boston to Washington.
Crucial capital spending on the route, the Northeast's economic lifeline, should not be held hostage by the tiresome debates over Amtrak's annual appropriations. Instead, Washington should be focused on fundamental policy choices. Two come immediately to mind. One is to establish a source of dedicated revenue for the development of high-speed rail, much as highways and commercial aviation have their own trust funds. The other is to consider abandoning the long-haul routes, or to at least finance them separately, in such a manner that they do not take dollars away from the sensible development of high-speed corridors.
Long-distance trains with such evocative names as the Empire Builder and the Sunset Limited may have nostalgia value for train buffs and political value for members of Congress whose districts they service. But when one assesses the nation's transportation needs and available resources, it is hard not to conclude that they are an unaffordable extravagance. An honest debate about the future of passenger rail is long overdue. If it takes place, America can still salvage and strengthen the train system it really needs.
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
Energy Articles from 2001
|
|
and Newsletters |
|
|