American Dream Meadowlands | photo: www.americandream.com

Even before the developers of American Dream Meadowlands (formerly “Xanadu“)—a hulking, still-half-built retail development currently lumbering towards completion in North Jersey—announced plans to add a theme park to the project, they had been ignoring a serious issue: how people would get there. TSTC recently [...]]]>  

American Dream Meadowlands | photo: www.americandream.com

Even before the developers of American Dream Meadowlands (formerly “Xanadu“)—a hulking, still-half-built retail development currently lumbering towards completion in North Jersey—announced plans to add a theme park to the project, they had been ignoring a serious issue: how people would get there. TSTC recently pointed this out in a Star-Ledger op-ed and called for American Dream’s developers to fund public transit to the site.

TSTC’s concern comes from the project’s draft supplemental environmental impact statement (DSEIS), which sidesteps the problem of transit access. By relying on the original EIS’ faulty traffic analysis and omitting plans for public transit funding, the revision fails to address the project’s impacts on traffic in the Meadowlands.

The studies were not methodologically sound

For a supplemental EIS to make logical sense, the first EIS must be sound. This is not true in the case of American Dream. In fact, in 2004, a joint government commission found that the project’s initial EIS didn’t investigate the project’s traffic impacts thoroughly enough, since it only examined the roads on the Meadowlands’ grounds:

“In order to properly evaluate the traffic impact [of the development], the applicant is advised to assess all major nodes and links within a regional context (recommended minimum radius of four (4) miles from the proposed project boundaries).”

Seven years later, no such study has been done (despite the opportunity presented by the DSEIS).

The initial and supplemental studies also relied on the Institute for Traffic Engineers’ generic “trip generation rates” in their traffic analyses. ITE trip generation rates’ shortcomings are well-documented, and they may not adequately capture American Dream’s scope and prominence. Instead of using bad, generic numbers, why not analyze consumer behavior at other megamalls and apply that information to Bergen County?

These methodological faults mean that nobody knows what the development could do to traffic in the Meadowlands.

Those same traffic studies assume transit service to the mall, but there is none

As if that weren’t enough, the initial EIS assumed that 10% of visitors would arrive by rail or bus. The developers were depending on public transit to help relieve the traffic that comes with a massive retail/entertainment destination, as it does at their other properties.

But while the supplemental report (DSEIS) relies on these public-transit-dependent traffic estimates, no regular bus lines currently service the site, and commuter rail service only runs during special events.

The developers assume that NJ Transit will add routes once the project is complete, but NJ Transit is already stretched thin, and it’s unrealistic to expect them to expand service without extra funds. The bill for transit to American Dream must be footed by someone, and it shouldn’t be the New Jersey taxpayer (who has already subsidized Triple Five Worldwide, the site’s developer, handsomely). Accordingly, TSTC is calling on Triple Five Worldwide to fund public transit to the site, which would ease traffic and make the destination attractive to those without cars.

NJ Transit’s second quarterly “Scorecard” results are in, and they aren’t anything to brag about. The agency’s overall score rose from 5.2 to 5.3 on a scale of 1 to 10, which NJ Transit still describes as “satisfactory” or “acceptable.” [...]]]>

Ratings on NJ Transit's second quarterly customer scorecard haven't changed much compared to the first scorecard.

NJ Transit’s second quarterly “Scorecard” results are in, and they aren’t anything to brag about. The agency’s overall score rose from 5.2 to 5.3 on a scale of 1 to 10, which NJ Transit still describes as “satisfactory” or “acceptable.” “Fares” and “on-time performance” remain the areas most frequently identified as in need of improvement system-wide. They are also the areas the agency has the least control over, pointing to the need for state policymakers to step up support for transit.

While light rail, bus, and Access Link (paratransit) all saw small improvements in overall customer satisfaction, rail scores dropped from 4.5 to 4.2.  This does not come as a shock as rail commuters suffered through significant delays over the past two months due to electrical problems, equipment problems and most notably an Amtrak derailment in one of the Hudson River tunnels that brought the entire region to a screeching halt.

Another data point from the survey getting a lot of attention is the overwhelming demand for increased bus service out of the Lincoln Tunnel during the evening rush. Commuters are looking for an increase in bus services during the weekday PM peak and on weekday evenings, suggesting the need for an express bus lane in the evenings, which TSTC has long called for.

Investment in mass transit must be a priority and is key in resolving this transit debacle.  But funding for transit is shrinking.  In 2004, almost half of the state’s transportation capital budget went to mass transit.  This year, NJ Transit is lucky to see a third. Don’t expect much improvement in on-time performance or service disruptions until this changes.

Almost 15,000 customers responded to the survey online and on transit vehicles during the summer months. Click here to sign up to take the current survey online. The agency is also holding listening sessions starting today.

Photo: Gasgoo.com

According to the agency, “the forums will give customers the opportunity to [...]]]> NJ Transit wants to hear from riders. As part of its ”Year of the Customer,” the agency has been rolling out efforts to acquire feedback from its customers.  To complement the “SCORE Card” initiative, NJ Transit is holding public forums “to hear about your experiences.”

According to the agency, “the forums will give customers the opportunity to speak directly with NJ TRANSIT general managers of operations and senior level staff.”

The next forums are scheduled as follows:

• Thursday, October 27 : 4:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. at New York Penn Station, 7th Avenue Concourse adjacent to the ticket windows.
• Tuesday, November 1: 4:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. at Hoboken Terminal, adjacent to the waiting room doors.

Check back for additional locations and times as announced by NJ Transit.

Upon beginning service in 2004, the RiverLINE, New Jersey Transit’s 34-mile light-rail service between Trenton and Camden, was often reported to have been an expensive mistake. Critics cited the large construction cost overruns and posited that South Jersey would see limited [...]]]>

A RiverLINE train passes through the Rutgers University-Camden Station. Source: Rutgers University-Camden

Upon beginning service in 2004, the RiverLINE, New Jersey Transit’s 34-mile light-rail service between Trenton and Camden, was often reported to have been an expensive mistake. Critics cited the large construction cost overruns and posited that South Jersey would see limited benefits from the line and that ridership would be much  lower than predicted. In 2004, MTR stated that, “…increases in ridership, as well as economic development along the line will be essential components to the RiverLINE’s long-term success.”

So, just how is the RiverLINE doing 7 years on?

Ridership

Over seven years into full operation, the RiverLINE has shown an upward trend in terms of ridership. Source: TSTC graph using data from NJ Transit.

Other than a small decline in ridership in  2010, the RiverLINE has shown a year on year increase in passenger trips since beginning service in 2004 (note: Passenger trip information is not included for 2004, because the RiverLINE only operated for part of this year). The slight decline in passenger trips in Fiscal Year 2010 came as NJ Transit issued a large fare hike, and was in line with the nationwide decrease in public transit ridership during that period, which has been attributed to persistently high unemployment. Notably, the RiverLINE saw a 10.05% increase in passenger trips in FY 2009, while nationwide public transit ridership declined by 3.8% during the same period (New Jersey’s unemployment rate at that time was in line with the overall US rate).

Economic Development

There is evidence of some beneficial economic effects for communities along the RiverLINE since service began. A study by the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center at Rutgers University found that growth in construction permits along the RiverLINE corridor between 2004 and 2007 was greater than the rate of growth in permits for the state overall, as well as for areas near, but not directly on the line. Additionally, during this same period, owners of residential units in lower-income Census tracts near RiverLINE stations saw net increases in the value of their homes. Report authors noted that zoning for development near the transit line could further those benefits to other areas.

There is also evidence that developers have chosen locations for new construction projects specifically due to proximity to the RiverLINE (including a planned redevelopment of two former knitting mills, located between Riverside’s town center and the train station, into residences). However, many of these projects are not yet under construction due to current economic conditions. One project that has been completed was significantly altered due to its proximity to the RiverLINE. The developer of a 97,000 square-foot condominium development in Cinnaminson, NJ, who had purchased the property before the opening of the transit service, substantially changed the design of the project so it was more integrated with the nearby transit station and had better pedestrian connections.

That developers see the service as an amenity and have shown interest in undertaking projects near the line is clearly in line with a recent Monmouth University poll showing that two-thirds of New Jersey residents would like to see the development of more sustainable communities, with easy access to multiple forms of transportation and opportunities for walking to shops and restaurants. Should ridership continue to increase, there should be even further incentive for developers to locate projects along the RiverLINE corridor.

Statewide, retail vacancies around transit hubs [...]]]> In today’s Star-Ledger, TSTC NJ Advocate Janna Chernetz and General Counsel Vincent Pellecchia write that the disruption caused by Hurricane Irene highlighted the importance of the transit network and the need to invest in the system. But in many ways, New Jersey is going in the opposite direction:

Statewide, retail vacancies around transit hubs are at 14.7 percent compared with 29.7 percent in areas not near such hubs.

But as demand grows for density and compactness, the state cut funding for programs that encourage this type of growth and the transit system that supports it.

In 2004, 49 percent of New Jersey’s transportation construction program was spent on public transportation. Every year since, that percentage has decreased. In 2012, the state will spend 32.9 percent on buses and rail. Commuters are becoming frustratingly aware of what this means for the transportation network: more delays, breakdowns, derailments and cancellations, not to mention more traffic as commuters cram into cars that add to poor road and bridge conditions, congestion and pollution problems.

Increased funding for transit would build more reliability and redundancy into the system and help spur the economy. Not doing so means more traffic on the roads and more of the derailments, electrical problems, and other delay-causing incidents that were plaguing NJ Transit even before the hurricane struck.

The storm also highlighted the importance of transit throughout the region. The closing of NYC’s subway system made global headlines, and heavy damage to Metro-North’s Port Jervis Line has caused great difficulty for those who used it.

At a August 22 press conference in South Plainfield, NJ Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno announced the award of 84 grants totaling $12 million to municipalities and counties for infrastructure improvement and safety projects. Among them was $100,000 for a transit village streetscape project in Linden, designated a Transit [...]]]>

Linden recently received a grant for streetscape improvements.

At a August 22 press conference in South Plainfield, NJ Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno announced the award of 84 grants totaling $12 million to municipalities and counties for infrastructure improvement and safety projects. Among them was $100,000 for a transit village streetscape project in Linden, designated a Transit Village in 2010. (There were 29 grants totaling $10 million through the Local Aid Infrastructure Fund program and 55 grants totaling $2 million through the Safe Corridor program.) Earlier this month NJDOT Commissioner Jim Simpson also offered a ringing endorsement of the Transit Village program, which helps towns support walkable, transit-oriented downtowns.

This is despite the fact that, as previously reported, dedicated funding for the Transit Village program was eliminated in this year’s budget.  While funding was restored through advocacy by Tri-State and NJ Future, Governor Christie used the line-item veto to cut it again.  Despite the cut, Commissioner Simpson promised to continue to fund transit village projects through Local Aid during budget testimony in March 2011.

The commissioner recently reiterated NJDOT’s dedication to transit villages during a ribbon-cutting ceremony for upgrades to the Somerville train station. NJ 101.5 reports:

As Jersey becomes increasingly crowded, state officials are pressing ahead with a plan to increase the number of ‘Transit Villages.’

State Department of Transportation Commissioner Jim Simpson says the idea is to create a situation where ‘you’ve got villages that surround rail stations, so people can actually live, walk, go to the stores, go to school, shop, get on public transportation and get to work where they don’t have to rely on an automobile…it’s an anti-sprawl effort…it’s to get back to doing things efficiently – you know why get into the car to go the cleaners, to get into the car to go to the supermarket, to get into the car so on and so forth if you can do it all around one area.’

He says when towns become a Transit Village, they receive increased funding and grant opportunities, and it means they are ‘areas that have demonstrated to the state that they’ve put the policies and procedures and zoning in place to allow for the development around a rail station…this is what we want to bring to the state to fight sprawl and to give people a reason to come back and live near the main town and not to live where they need to get into a car to do everything…we’re really trying to get the message out that this administration supports Transit Villages, supports transit oriented development.’ [...]

Jersey has a total of 23 Transit Villages right now, but that number is expected to grow in the coming months.

It is worth noting that while Somerville is a designated Transit Village, it only acquired such status in 2010.  The completed project at the Somerville station was part of NJ Transit’s “initiative to make ADA upgrades at 35 key commuter rail stations,” and was not funded through the Transit Village program.

Is the Linden grant proof that Commissioner Simpson is keeping true to his promise? Tri-State reached out to NJDOT and was advised that the grant was actually funded through last fiscal year’s budget. Nonetheless, the fact that the Linden Transit Village project was funded through Local Aid is promising, and hopefully, worthy transit village projects will continue to be funded.  Stay tuned; the year has only just begun.

Photo: Flickr/jag9889.

The passing of a relatively obscure bureaucratic deadline was another reminder of how badly improvements to the cross-Hudson transit system are needed. Yesterday the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, [...]]]>

Crowds at NYC's Penn Station after a derailment on NJ Transit. Frequent delays on cross-Hudson transit hurt the region's productivity and quality of life.

The passing of a relatively obscure bureaucratic deadline was another reminder of how badly improvements to the cross-Hudson transit system are needed. Yesterday the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, which approves federal transportation funding in northern NJ, closed comments on its draft Transportation Improvement Program, a list of federally funded projects. One of the biggest changes between this TIP and the previous one? The formal removal of the Access to the Region’s Core rail tunnel, which would have added two tracks between NYC and New Jersey, doubling NJ Transit rail service. The badly needed tunnel was, of course, canceled last year by NJ Governor Chris Christie. There seems to be disappointingly little urgency to address the choked cross-Hudson transit commute.

In the aftermath of the ARC Tunnel’s death, two new rail tunnel concepts appeared — Amtrak’s “Gateway Tunnel” to provide new tracks for Amtrak and NJ Transit, and an extension of NYC’s No. 7 subway line to Secaucus, NJ. But Amtrak’s tunnel looks to be a long way off given the current state of federal politics, with House Republicans aiming to starve transportation and privatize the national rail system. And Crain’s Insider recently reported that “talk of extending the No. 7 train to Secaucus has quieted.”

Even if such projects had broad political support, they would likely be decades in the making. ARC had been planned and studied for 20 years when it was canceled.

A nearer-term hope for cross-Hudson transit has been improving and expanding bus travel, which 315,000 people rely on daily. But a bus garage on NYC’s West Side that is essential to this effort has again been pushed back after the Port Authority’s proposed capital plan was reduced last week, along with its proposed toll and fare increases. The trimmed-down capital plan includes some projects needed for bus improvements, like a reconstruction of the “helix” road leading into the tunnel on the NJ side. The phasing in of the PATH fare increase also offers some relief for transit riders. But the bus garage is back on an uncertain schedule and will be dependent on a public-private partnership, as Times Herald-Record columnist Judy Rife points out:

“This should be a big deal when you already have 315,000 people using buses every single day and a terminal and a tunnel at or near capacity,” said Veronica Vanterpool at the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

The garage would give NJ Transit, Short Line and other companies a place to park their buses between the morning and evening rush and have them at the ready for their homeward-bound customers.

Now, they’re forced to park them in Weehawken and Jersey City and bring them back through the Lincoln Tunnel empty — by the hundreds, in traffic that’s bad enough without buses — and pay the toll again, a toll that soars to $10 from $4 in September. [...]

Of course, all these buses can’t fit into the PABT at the same time, so they circle, circle, circle the streets in [Manhattan Community Board 4 member Christine] Berthet’s neighborhood until there is room at the inn.

As Rife notes, bus delays in the evening are so common that many commuters who take the bus into NYC in the morning opt for the train on the way home. But train riders have faced their own issues, with derailments, electrical problems, and other snafus leading to hours of delay this summer. (It’s not as if this is an unusually bad summer, either; last July and August NJ Transit trains were hit with major delays almost weekly.)

Photo: WCBS 880/Marla Diamond.

USDOT announced today that it has released $745 million for two high-speed rail projects to improve service on the Northeast Corridor in New Jersey and New York. The move ensures that Amtrak will receive the [...]]]>

A $450 million grant for the Northeast Corridor should lead to more reliable service on NJ Transit and Amtrak.

USDOT announced today that it has released $745 million for two high-speed rail projects to improve service on the Northeast Corridor in New Jersey and New York. The move ensures that Amtrak will receive the grants, which were put at risk when the House voted to cut high-speed rail funding and use the funds for flood relief instead as part of an energy and water appropriations bill. (Some rail projects elsewhere in the country may still be at risk; the bill is currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee).

New Jersey Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood in July urging that USDOT release the funds before they could be rescinded by potential Congressional action. Elected officials in both New York and New Jersey helped push for the Northeast Corridor grants, which were awarded in May after Florida rejected its grant.

One $450 million grant will be used for catenary wire and other improvements between Trenton and New York City and create a 24-mile segment of track capable of supporting train speeds up to 160 mph between Trenton and New Brunswick, NJ, according to USDOT. The other $295 million grant will untangle the Harold Interlocking in Queens, a convergence of tracks where Amtrak, LIRR, and NJ Transit trains (headed to a storage yard in Queens) merge.

The reliability improvements in New Jersey should provide relief for NJ Transit and Amtrak riders, who have suffered through another delay-filled summer on the Northeast Corridor. Clearing up the interlocking will reduce delays for both Amtrak and the LIRR.

Photo: Via wn.com.

Selected results from NJ Transit's SCORE Card customer survey. Click to view all results.

During April and May, 19,000 riders filled out surveys rating NJ Transit in [...]]]> I can’t remember ever receiving a 52% on a test in school and that being considered “satisfactory” or “acceptable.”  Hopefully, NJ Transit doesn’t think so either.

Selected results from NJ Transit's SCORE Card customer survey. Click to view all results.

During April and May, 19,000 riders filled out surveys rating NJ Transit in 4 areas: facilities, service/vehicles, communications, and overall.  At the July 13 board meeting, NJ Transit officials released the first-ever results of this SCORE card initiative: a system-wide average score of 5.2 on a scale of 1 to 10, with rail riders the most dissatisfied (see results at right).

The Northeast Corridor rail line, serving 56,700 passengers daily, received the lowest overall satisfaction score of 4.0. Riders on the line gave NJ Transit a score of just 3.5 for “on-time performance,” and a 2.9 for “handling of disruptions.” Mechanical reliability and announcements during disruptions also got low scores, along with fares. The Atlantic City line received the highest overall satisfaction rate of 6.8.

A similar dissatisfaction was felt among New York interstate bus riders.  90,300 riders daily rely on NJ Transit bus service to bring them in and out of New York.  ”New York Interstate” buses received the lowest overall satisfaction among bus routes, 5.1.  Again, the biggest areas where NJ Transit fell short were, ”on-time performance,” “handling of disruptions,” “weekday evening schedules” and “fares.”

It’s not surprising that NJ Transit received a mediocre grade this first time out.  Wounds are still fresh for transit riders stemming from the 22% fare hike and decrease in service seen last year, the cancellation of the ARC project and recent morning/evening rush hour rail delays due to ailing infrastructure. NJ Transit has gone on the record stating that there will be no fare hikes this year.

Making the Grade

Courtney Carroll, NJ Transit spokeswoman, indicated that this survey data will be used as a  “baseline” for the SCORE card and “use the results to target specific improvements to customer satisfaction.”  Surveys will then be conducted on a quarterly basis to not only determine customer satisfaction, but how NJ Transit responds to prior customer feedback.  NJ Transit identified several areas needing improvement in the first survey go-round, but declined to comment on whether an action plan is currently in place to address them. Here are some suggestions to get state leaders  started:

Fight for Northeast Corridor improvements. The line’s abysmal ratings show it needs investment that will improve reliability, such as a $450 million federal grant for electrical fixes that is at risk of being cut.

Improve the cross-Hudson commute by working with the Port Authority to add a second Manhattan-bound bus lane leading up to the Lincoln Tunnel in the morning and a westbound bus lane during evening rush hours.  This will allow for additional NJ Transit buses and help ease congestion along the cross-Hudson commute, addressing the low scores from interstate bus riders.  NJ Transit should also work along with PANYNJ to resolve the bus parking issue so NYC-bound buses do not have to return to NJ after the morning commute.

Institute bus rapid transit in select cities. NJ Transit has made some small steps towards implementing frequent, fast BRT through ”Go Bus” in Newark and Bloomfield.  Increased service (as promised by the Christie administration) and the use of bus-only lanes, pay-before-you-board fare collection, and other BRT improvements would make life easier for bus riders concerned with on-time performance and weekday evening schedules.

Image: TSTC graphic using NJ Transit data.