Kolluri: Thinking Bigger, But Not Better
At the “Thinking Bigger” conference at NYU yesterday, NJDOT Commissioner and NJ Turnpike Authority Chairman Kris Kolluri listed the hefty needs of the state’s transportation network, and, once again, included the expansion of the NJ Turnpike as a vital priority. Currently, however, the Turnpike project is a choice, not a need.
South and West Dominate Transit Ballots
Voters across the country considered 18 transit-related ballot measures last week, mostly in southern or western states that asked voters to support transit expansion projects that will likely seek funding from the FTA’s New Starts program to match state and local spending approved by voters. This has implications for the tri-state region.
Connecticut Bonding Bill Finally Passes
On Oct. 30, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a $2.9 billion bonding bill, ending a 5-month impasse between Assembly Democrats and Gov. Rell (see MTR #565). The new bill includes $864 million allocated to transportation projects.
Port Authority Fare and Toll Increases on the Way?
It is widely expected that the Port Authority will announce the details of a fare and toll increase on the PATH system and the NJ-NY automobile crossings at its board meeting tomorrow. The toll increases are a necessary prerequisite for what the New York Times called a “robust agenda” of projects.
ConnDOT Rebuffs Calls For More Bike Lanes
Connecticut State Rep. Thomas Kehoe (D-31) has written on more than one occasion to ConnDOT Commissioner Ralph Carpenter asking for greater bike access on Connecticut roads and highways. His calls, focused mainly on including bike and pedestrian lanes on the William H. Putnam Route 3 Bridge and along the Route 2 corridor in Glastonbury, unfortunately, have been rejected on more than one occasion.
Transit Blooms on the Pascack Valley Line
Oct. 28 marked the first day of the Metro-North and NJ Transit Pascack Valley Line’s new schedule, which includes bi-directional, off-peak, and weekend service for the first time ever. The more-than-doubling of weekly service should dramatically increase ridership, with implications for transit projects in the region.
To Our Readers
This is the last edition of Mobilizing the Region in its current bulletin format. As you may have heard, MTR is now available in blog form at http://blog.tstc.org. Fax subscribers, please sign up for e-mail subscriptions at tstc.org or read the blog online. HTML and PDF e-mail subscribers will receive weekly updates containing summaries and links to the week’s blog posts. If you plan to regularly read the blog and no longer wish to receive e-mail updates, please send an e-mail to tstc@tstc.org with “unsubscribe” in the subject line.
The MTA faced an overwhelming amount of public opposition to proposed fare and toll hikes at hearings throughout New York City over the last two weeks.
Several elected officials, including State Assm. Jim Brennan (D-44) and State Sen. Eric Adams (D-20), were also present and urged the MTA Board, as did many others, to hold off on a fare and toll hike until after they have had time to find more state money for commuters.
Such a situation of state elected officials advocating for more dollars to alleviate the possibility of a fare hike is rare, perhaps unprecedented. It’s a welcome shift from past history — many of the vocal fare hike opponents are partly responsible for the MTA’s current financial mess, and were part of the NY State Legislature that overburdened the MTA with debt (see MTR # 561). Hopefully, there's a good chance state leaders will take their responsibility for funding the transit system seriously come the start of the next legislative session in January. Two bills sponsored by Assm. Brennan (A9424 and A9425) would raise an additional $685 million for the MTA and may be a good starting point for discussion. The Campaign is certainly prepared to hold state electeds’ “feet to the fire” if they do not come through on their public statements.
At the Brooklyn hearing, Straphangers Campaign staff attorney Gene Russianoff called on the governor to stand up for transit riders. Unfortunately, the governor failed to take a position on the hike, instead saying the decision was up to the MTA board.
Tri-State Campaign staffer Ryan Lynch, in addition to asking for a delay in the fare and toll hike, urged the MTA to bring its toll facilities into the 21st century. In the Campaign’s testimony, he reiterated TSTC’s call for variable pricing on tolls (see also
MTR # 564) and urged the MTA to implement high-speed and cashless tolls at its bridges in order to reduce pollution and congestion and to improve safety. As
MTR has frequently reported, other agencies in the region, like the Port Authority and NJ Turnpike Authority, are years ahead of the MTA in this regard, with high-speed tolls and variable pricing already in place on many facilities.
[Back to Top]
Kolluri: Thinking Bigger, but not Better
At the “Thinking Bigger” conference at NYU yesterday, NJDOT Commissioner and NJ Turnpike Authority Chairman Kris Kolluri listed the hefty needs of the state’s transportation network, and, once again, included the expansion of the NJ Turnpike as a vital priority.
Kolluri has consistently included the Turnpike widening, which would add up to three lanes in each direction from exits 6 to 9, among the state’s urgent transportation needs. Often the Turnpike widening is depicted as equal in importance to, say, bridge maintenance and the ARC passenger rail tunnel under the Hudson River. Yesterday, the Commissioner was at it again, saying the Turnpike Authority had $5 billion in debt on its books, specifically mentioning the 170-lane-mile expansion project.
Currently, however, the Turnpike project is a choice, not a need. In fact, it’s likely that less expensive and invasive alternatives, like stronger variable pricing incentives, HOT lanes, expanded mass transit, or the establishment of a freight management corridor, would do more to reduce congestion on the Turnpike in the long term than the $2 billion expansion project. Unfortunately, environmental documents for the project fail to adequately analyze these alternatives, instead dismissing them out of hand, often with only a few paragraphs of review.
Such alternatives have political benefits as well, since another controversial aspect of the Turnpike project is the acquisition of 381 acres of private land by eminent domain, a fact that has folks from communities such as Bordentown up in arms. (The Turnpike Authority’s poor public outreach doesn’t help matters—despite increasing environmental awareness in our region, the project’s website still lists such egregious things as “10 million cubic yards of earthwork,” and “114 acres of wetland impact” as “Program Highlights” (see MTR # 565).
Kolluri was clearly making the case for Gov. Corzine’s soon-to-be-released asset monetization plan, which seeks to raise revenue by leasing public assets like the NJ Turnpike for private investment. His argument is built around the very real fact that NJ’s Transportation Trust Fund is empty after 2011, and that driving on the Turnpike and Garden State Parkway remains one of the best deals around: tolls on the GSP translate into 2.2 cents a mile, while those on the Turnpike are at 5.5 cents a mile (GSP tolls haven’t increased since the late ’80s, and Turnpike tolls have increased five times in about fifty years.) Kolluri is right that NJ’s transportation needs are enormous, but to include the Turnpike expansion in that list is moving the state backward, not forward.
Unfortunately, there was no Q-and-A session after Kolluri’s keynote address. Had there been, the obvious question Tri-State would have asked is this:
“The NJDOT has been a leader in moving away from highway expansion as a means of solving congestion, and towards a more holistic approach that connects local land use planning with transportation projects. In the mid-nineties, NJDOT was spending over 50% of its capital dollars on roadway expansion. Today, that number is down to less than 3%.
However, the reform has clearly not extended to the NJ Turnpike Authority. In an era of managed lanes, variable pricing, and fixing existing infrastructure first, and given NJDOT’s leadership in the incorporation of smart growth concepts and connecting land use and transportation, why are you still turning to an old-fashioned, expensive widening project to solve congestion on the Turnpike?”
Commissioner, we look forward to a response.
[Back to Top]
South and West Dominate Transit Ballot Measures
According to the Center for Transit Excellence, voters across the country considered 18 ballot measures to support transit last week. Voters have historically approved funding to increase transit service, particularly when the funding is linked to a specific project.
Of the 18 measures, a dozen were in southern or western states. Several asked voters to approve tax increases or bonding to support transit expansion projects that will likely seek funding from the FTA’s New Starts program to match state and local spending approved by voters.
To be eligible for New Starts funding, projects must demonstrate the ability to raise enough state and local funds to cover at least 20% of the project cost. The success of transit funding ballot initiatives will only expand the pool of applicants for the popular program.
In the tri-state region, only one transit-related measure made it to the ballot; voters in Milford and Stratford soundly rejected Metro-North’s proposal to eliminate 2 stops on an afternoon train.
The FTA has already committed to partially fund the LIRR East Side Access project and the first phase of the Second Avenue Subway. However, agencies in the region will be starting at a disadvantage when they seek funding for the other major transit projects in the pipeline.
[Back to Top]
Connecticut Bonding Bill Finally Passes
On Oct. 30, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a $2.9 billion bonding bill, ending a 5-month impasse between Assembly Democrats and Gov. Rell (see MTR #565). The new bill includes $864 million allocated to transportation projects. Some highlights include:
- Cancellation of the proposed $1-per-trip fare hike for the New Haven Line (see MTR #500). Instead, a 1.25% fare increase will take effect in 2010, with an annual 1% increase until 2016.
- $150 million for the establishment of a “fix-it-first” program for Connecticut’s existing state roads and bridges.
- $20 million for bus connectivity improvements, including new bus maintenance and storage facilities in the Windham and Torrington regions, clean diesel bus retrofits, and new vehicles for elderly and disabled “dial-a-ride” programs.
- $12 million slotted to the Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) for the establishment of a bikeway grants program for municipalities.
- $5 million allocated to a transit-oriented development pilot program.
- Funding to increase monitoring and transparency of truck weigh station activities and create safer highways and roads.
While these transportation dollars are welcomed, many of the details in the aforementioned projects are cause for concern.
The TOD pilot program, for example, defines TOD in extremely broad terms (see MTR #552). The program does define TOD as mixed-use development within one-half mile or walking distance of transit facilities, but also makes eligible for funding any “strategic transportation” project, any project with substantial government funding, and any project where substantial planning is under way or has been completed. Given this definition, “transit-oriented development” could occur in CT with little regard to actually developing around transit hubs.
The bonding bill also allocates $150 million to “fix-it-first” programs dedicated to rehabilitating and rebuilding state highways and bridges. While the gesture is appreciated, the Campaign would prefer to see ConnDOT’s capital budget espousing “fix-it-first” policy, rather than an additional program dedicated to repairing roads and bridges.
Finally, municipal bikeway grant funding should go to ConnDOT and not DEP. Failing to dedicate this funding to ConnDOT discredits cycling as a legitimate means of transportation that should be included in its transit solutions repertoire.
The ConnDOT Reform Commission will deliver its recommendations to Gov. Rell on Dec. 1.
[Back to Top]
Port Authority Fare and Toll Increases on the Way?
It is widely expected that the Port Authority will announce the details of a fare and toll increase on the PATH system and the NJ-NY automobile crossings at its board meeting tomorrow. Tolls on the Goethals, Bayonne, and GW Bridges, Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, and the Outerbridge Crossing will reportedly increase $2; cash users currently pay $6, while E-Z Pass users pay $5 during peak hours and $4 off-peak. The PATH fare will increase from $1.50 to $2. The Tri-State Campaign has urged the Authority to increase the differential between peak and off-peak tolls, to encourage more drivers to travel during less congested times.
The toll increases are a necessary prerequisite for what the New York Times called a “robust agenda” of projects. At the top of the list is the ARC rail tunnel, which would double peak-hour capacity on NJ Transit’s New York-bound rail network, allow more New Jersey commuters a one-seat ride to NYC, and reduce congestion at the Hudson crossings. The Port Authority’s other plans include completing a study of the cross-harbor rail freight tunnel, and replacing the PATH system’s signal system and rolling stock.
A rise in Port Authority tolls could decrease the revenue from NYC’s proposed congestion pricing plan, since E-Z Pass users would have their tolls deducted from the $8 congestion fee. However, with or without a toll increase, New Jerseyans would pay $8 to drive into Midtown Manhattan. In fact, the congestion pricing plan was designed to fund the ARC tunnel (and other critical transit projects), so it makes little difference what fraction of the $8 fee goes to the PA and what part goes to a congestion pricing plan—either way the $8 is a contribution towards transit projects of regional significance.
The Port Authority will need to make a strong case to the public that a PATH fare increase is warranted and if one is necessary, ensure that tolls increase by a larger percentage than fares. Generally, people who drive in the region are more likely to be able to afford higher transportation costs than those who rely on transit. The New York Post reported this week that most NJ drivers on the GW Bridge and Lincoln and Holland Tunnels earn more than $100,000 annually.
Unfortunately, Trenton continues to ignore this fact. Despite booming ridership, fares on NJ Transit trains have steadily risen over the past few decades, increasing most recently this past summer. On the other hand, the gas tax and Garden State Parkway tolls have remained stagnant since the late eighties. At least the Port Authority is seeking a fare and toll increase in tandem, rather than relying on transit riders to shoulder more of the burden of our regional transportation network.
[Back to Top]
Connecticut State Rep. Thomas Kehoe (D-31) has written on more than one occasion to ConnDOT Commissioner Ralph Carpenter asking for greater bike access on Connecticut roads and highways. His calls, focused mainly on including bike and pedestrian lanes on the William H. Putnam Route 3 Bridge and along the Route 2 corridor in Glastonbury, unfortunately, have been rejected on more than one occasion.
In each response letter, Commissioner Carpenter has used dubious language and even more dubious reasoning to explain the Department’s antipathy towards Rep. Kehoe’s ideas. Most glaringly, is that Connecticut State Statutes “prohibit bicycle access to interstate highways and expressways.” Even if this is the case, the statute is antiquated and should be repealed, especially since bikeways already exist on I-291 and I-95 bridges. Laws are not static entities, never to be changed or modified.
Commissioner Carpenter also reasons that there is no funding available for “projects to assist the non-motorized public.” But he fails to mention that there are no funds available because ConnDOT has chosen to spend the money elsewhere. According to a TSTC report, 36% of ConnDOT’s budget is flexible funding and can be spent on any transportation project, including bike and pedestrian projects. Unfortunately, most of that money—72%—is now going into road projects, a fact that is even more depressing given that only .9% of the state’s total transportation budget is spent on biking and walking. Also, ConnDOT recently rescinded $10 million of Federal Enhancements dollars, money generally allocated to bike and pedestrian projects, the same types of projects that Rep. Kehoe is calling for.
While this response is saddening, more disturbing is the overall opposition to thinking ‘outside the box’ by ConnDOT leadership. Gov. Rell set up the ConnDOT Reform Commission earlier this year with a mandate of creating “a more responsive, more responsible DOT and a DOT that will continue to broaden its focus beyond highways”, a call that Rep. Kehoe clearly had in mind when he submitted his letters to Commissioner Carpenter. So far, ConnDOT hasn’t gotten the memo.
The ConnDOT Reform Commission is charged with sending a list of recommendations to Governor Rell by Dec. 1, and should, among other things, recommend that the agency spend much more on bike and pedestrian projects. If the state is going to combat sprawl with responsible growth, as Governor Rell hopes, ConnDOT will have to stop rebuffing elected officials’ requests for local biking and walking projects.
[Back to Top]
Oct. 28 marked the first day of the Metro-North and NJ Transit Pascack Valley Line’s new schedule, which includes bi-directional, off-peak, and weekend service for the first time ever. The more-than-doubling of weekly service should dramatically increase ridership.
The improvements underscore the need for the trans-Hudson ARC rail tunnel to relieve crowding on the NJ Transit system at peak hours. Though the additional service is concentrated at off-peak times, it allows commuters increased flexibility and should increase ridership at all times, including rush hour.
In combination with the ARC tunnel, the line improvements weaken the case for building commuter rail across the Tappan Zee Bridge/I-287 corridor. Early NYSDOT projections from the TZ Bridge Alternatives Analysis show that, if rail transit was constructed across the corridor, many rail trips would end in Manhattan (see also MTR #530). However, the Alternatives Analysis projections did not take into account the ARC tunnel or the Pascack Valley improvements; many Rockland commuters projected to take a new Tappan Zee rail line may choose to take the Pascack Valley Line to NYC through the ARC tunnel instead. By contrast, a cross-corridor bus rapid transit system would attract mostly east-west suburb-to-suburb commuters, the primary cause of congestion on the TZ Bridge.
[Back to Top]
This is the last edition of Mobilizing the Region in its current bulletin format. As you may have heard, MTR is now available in blog form at http://blog.tstc.org.
Why did we make the change? The primary reason is that the blog format allows us to be both timelier and more thorough with our news coverage. We’re also intrigued by the ways in which blogging can help expand and mobilize the advocacy community. There may be other benefits to joining the blogosphere we haven’t even thought of yet; we’re new to this, after all.
What does this mean for current MTR subscribers? Well, for one, we will no longer be sending the fax and PDF versions of MTR. Fax users, please sign up for e-mail subscriptions at tstc.org or read the blog online.
HTML and PDF e-mail subscribers will receive weekly updates containing summaries and links to the week’s blog posts. If you plan to regularly read the blog and no longer wish to receive e-mail updates, please send an e-mail to tstc@tstc.org with “unsubscribe” in the subject line.
[Back to Top]
