DOCSLIB.ORG

Choices & Voices Version 2.0 Results

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Choices & Voices Version 2.0 Results CHOICES & VOICES VERSION 2.0 RESULTS The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) launched Choices & Voices version 2.0 in October 2013 to reflect the newly adopted Connections 2040 Long-Range Plan key assumptions, including projected revenue through 2040, the updated transportation needs assessment, and to account for SEPTA’s proposed realignment plan. This online survey tool remains a key component of public outreach for long-range planning in Greater Philadelphia. Choices & Voices serves as a way for members of the public to share their preferences for future development patterns, transportation projects, and approaches to funding them. At the same time, it contains an educational component that offers the users a better understanding of the linkages between land use and transportation, the considerable basic maintenance and repair issues of the transportation network, and the consequences of failing to invest in transportation. Shortly after Choices & Voices version 2.0 was launched, Pennsylvania passed a significant transportation funding bill, Act 89, which substantially increased transportation funding in the state and removed SEPTA’s realignment plan from the discussion. With the passage of Act 89, DVRPC did little to market Choices & Voices version 2.0. In spite of this, more than 500 people viewed the site, and 66 regional vision scenarios were submitted to DVRPC. Nearly 1,900 people viewed version 1.0 and more than 250 regional vision scenarios were submitted to the original version. As an online application open to anyone, results should not be construed as a scientifically representational sample. However, Choices & Voices is one of a number of components that are used to develop the Long-Range Plan. Other components include: regional indicators, scenario planning, dialogue with planning partners (state, county, and local governments, departments of transportation, and transit operators), additional public outreach, federal and state guidance, and other DVRPC programs such as the Transportation Improvement Program and the Congestion Management Process. DVRPC PLANNING AREAS DVRPC characterizes each of the region’s 352 municipalities as a Core City, Developed Community, Growing Suburb, or Rural Area, as a means of categorizing the types of communities and defining the corresponding long- range planning policies most appropriate for each type. Responses were analyzed for the region as a whole and for each of the four regional planning areas, using the ZIP code provided by the respondent. DVRPC Planning Areas 1 CHOICES & VOICES VERSION 2.0 RESULTS More than two-thirds of the respondents to version 2.0 came from one of the region’s Developed Communities. Some 14 scenarios were submitted, but with ZIP codes that were missing or outside the nine-county DVRPC region. Those scenarios did not receive further evaluation. Count of Choices & Voices Submitted Scenarios by DVRPC Planning Area *Submitted scenarios with missing ZIP codes or ZIP codes not in the nine-county region are not further analyzed. Source: DVRPC 2014 The largest group of respondents to version 2.0 were those between 18 and 24 years old. More than half of all respondents to date (including version 1.0) have been under the age of 34. These age groups have typically been less involved in metropolitan planning organization long-range planning efforts. Age of Choices & Voices Respondents Source: DVRPC 2014 CHOICES & VOICES RESULTS Choices & Voices showed the correlation between development patterns and transportation system use. Based on the submitted scenarios, respondents on average favored a more sustainable transportation future that results in 1.4 percent fewer regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT), an eight percent increase in biking and walking trips, and a 24 percent increase in transit ridership. This would mean a 3.5 percent reduction in residential energy and transportation costs, and a four percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Improving fuel 2 CHOICES & VOICES VERSION 2.0 RESULTS efficiency and lowering carbon content fuels will be vital to achieving the Plan goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 60 percent by 2040. The table below shows the marginal differences respondents to version 1.0 and version 2.0 proposed, compared to the existing conditions. As respondents provided their ZIP code, they were broken into geographic types to show how choices might be affected by where a respondent lives. Indicator Results from Submitted Scenarios REGIONAL MARGINAL CHANGE CHOICES & VOICES VALUE IN CORE DEVELOPED GROWING RURAL TOTAL INDICATOR VERSION 2040 CITY COMMUNITY SUBURB AREA* REGION Acres Developed (2010–2040)** 1.0 811,000 13,800 20,400 29,100 18,200 20,400 2.0 1,121,600 16,200 43,500 30,500 N/A 36,000 Vehicle Miles Traveled (annual 1.0 7,230 –190 –130 40 30 –140 per capita) 2.0 7,380 –100 70 90 N/A 40 Bike/Ped Trips (annual per capita) 1.0 92 7.6 7.2 4.9 5.7 7.0 2.0 100 6.2 4.9 5.3 N/A 5.2 Transit Trips (annual per capita) 1.0 74.3 19.4 15.9 10.4 12.7 16.3 2.0 68.7 10.7 3.3 2.4 N/A 4.7 Household Transportation and 1.0 $13,130 $480 $450 $640 $480 $500 Residential Energy Costs (annual cost) 2.0 $13,290 $320 $200 $170 N/A $220 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1.0 7.4 –0.3 –0.3 –0.2 –0.2 –0.3 (metric tons CO2 equivalent per capita) 2.0 7.2 –0.6 –0.4 –0.4 N/A –0.4 Safety (annual fatalities per 1.0 7.0 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 100,000 trips) 2.0 7.3 0.1 0.3 0.3 N/A 0.2 Congestion (annual hours per 1.0 25.0 2.9 3.2 4.6 2.6 3.2 year in traffic for drivers)*** 2.0 31.6 10.9 9.5 9.8 N/A 9.8 * Version 2.0 had no respondents from Rural Areas. ** Version 2.0 accounts for all types of land development, whereas version 1.0 accounted only for residential and commercial development. *** Version 2.0 revised congestion assumptions based on new VISSIM travel demand model results (TIM 2.0), and incorporated delay from poor pavement conditions, which was not included in Version 1.0. Source: DVRPC 2014 It is worth noting that congestion was recomputed between version 1.0 and version 2.0 to account for DVRPC’s improved travel demand model, TIM 2.0, which uses VISSUM software. Version 2.0 also accounted for delay due to deteriorating pavement conditions, which were not reflected in the first version. Version 1.0 focused solely on commercial, industrial, and residential land use to determine acres developed. Version 2.0 also accounted for additional types of development such as: community, recreational, transportation, and utility uses. Some notable trends arise from the results of the two versions. First, respondents indicated little desire for more driving at a per capita level, particularly the residents from Core Cities and Developed Communities who decreased per capita annual VMT. Similarly, residents from more dense areas favored higher rates of alternative modes such as transit and walking/biking, perhaps seeing these are more readily available options than in less dense areas of the region. While respondents from all areas expected a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, respondents from denser areas were able to achieve even greater reductions. Respondents from all areas preferred growth patterns that are significantly more compact than the region has seen in recent development trends. The chart on the next page demonstrates the variation in choices by respondent origin regarding VMT. 3 CHOICES & VOICES VERSION 2.0 RESULTS Change in Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Capita: 2010 to 2040 by Version Source: DVRPC 2014 Continue reading to learn more about how individuals made their choices. DEVELOPMENT PREFERENCES Respondents to both versions identified a vision of a higher-density, mixed-use development pattern that is walkable, bikeable, and transit oriented. More than 90 percent of all respondents’ preferred future development that is located near to existing centers, and where alternative transportation infrastructure is already in place. This is largely in line with the Connections 2040 vision of focusing development in more than 120 centers around the region (the Towns & Cities option), though the overall preference of the respondents was for a higher-density, more centralized land use pattern. Respondents’ Development and Location Preferences by Planning Area (Versions 1.0 and 2.0) Source: DVRPC 2014 The average respondent scenario would require developing roughly 36,400 new acres (proportionally accounting for all types of land uses in version 1.0) of land from 2010 to 2040. Continuing the development trends over the last two decades would mean around 60,000 to 70,000 additional acres developed over that period. Overall, respondents preferred a development pattern that would consume less new acreage compared to the trend. TRANSPORTATION FUNDING In version 2.0, 96 percent of respondents selected additional funding for their scenario, a slight increase over the 93 percent of respondents who identified some level of additional funding in version 1.0. The average scenario in version 2.0 had $215 in additional funds per household per year. This is greater than the maximum allowed in version 1.0 of $240 per household per year; respondents in version 1.0 averaged nearly $140 of additional annual household funding. 4 CHOICES & VOICES VERSION 2.0 RESULTS Amount of Additional Funding per Household per Year* *Version 1.0 limited the new tax or fees to $240 per household per year; version 2.0 limited them to $750 per year. Source: DVRPC 2014 The top funding options were raising the gas tax and congestion pricing, followed by adding vehicle registration fees.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Delaware River Port Authority (DRPA)
    DELAWARE RIVER PORT AUTHORITY & PORT AUTHORITY TRANSIT CORP. BOARD MEETING Wednesday, July 18, 2018 9:00 a.m. One Port Center Board Room Camden, NJ John T. Hanson, Chief Executive Officer DRPA BOARD DELAWARE RIVER PORT AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. One Port Center, 11th Floor, Board Room Camden, New Jersey ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Roll Call 2. Public Comment 3. Report of the CEO – July 2018 4. Report of the CFO 5. 2017 Comprehensive Annual Financials 6. 2018 First Quarter Financial Statement and Notes 7. Approval of June 20, 2018 Board Meeting Minutes 8. Monthly List of Previously Approved Payments of June 2018 9. Monthly List of Previously Approved Purchase Orders and Contracts of June 2018 10. Approval of Operations & Maintenance Committee Meeting Minutes of July 10, 2018 11. Adopt Resolutions Approved by Operations & Maintenance Committee of July 10, 2018 DRPA-18-067 Contract No. CB-35-2017, Commodore Barry Bridge Joint Rehabilitation & Bearing Replacement DRPA-18-068 Capital Project Contract Modification DRPA-18-069 Rain Garden Agreement at Ben Franklin Bridge Between DRPA and CCMUA DRPA-18-070 Procurement and Delivery of Highway Rock Salt For DRPA and PATCO Facilities DRPA-18-071 Eight (8) 2019 Ford Interceptor Patrol Vehicles DRPA-18-072 DRPA Application for Grant Funding through FY 2018 US Department of Transportation Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development or “BUILD Transportation Discretionary Grant,” for the Reopening of Franklin Square Station on the PATCO Transit Line 12. Approval of Labor Committee Meeting Minutes of July 10, 2018 13. Adopt Resolutions Approved by Labor Committee of July 10, 2018 DRPA-18-073 Approval of Policy #400 Expense Reimbursement for Employees and Board Members 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Bridge Toll and PATCO Fare Schedules
    Proposed Bridge Toll and PATCO Fare Schedules July 2008 Dear DRPA and PATCO Customers: Thank you for your interest in the Delaware River Port Authority and Port Authority Transit Corporation. We appreciate the opportunity to present to you the proposed changes to the toll and fare structures. For the last several years, we have committed to cost-savings measures that have enabled us to operate without changes to our toll or fare structures. However, we now face a very challenging time as our future needs will require us to find additional revenue sources to fund our Capital Program which is critical to maintaining the safety, security and serviceability of our assets. We are confident that with the feedback received from you, our customers, we will be able to propose a plan to our Board of Commissioners that will enable us to face the challenges that lie ahead. We value your opinion and look forward to your comments and suggestions. Yours truly, John J. Matheussen Chief Executive Officer, Delaware River Port Authority President, Port Authority Transit Corporation The Delaware River Port Authority The Delaware River Port Authority of Pennsylvania and New Jersey is a regional transportation agency. DRPA’s lines of business, collectively called “the Authority,” operate under the motto “We Keep the Region Moving.” DRPA traces its roots back to 1919 when leaders from the two states began planning for a bridge across the Delaware River. That bridge, now known as the Benjamin Franklin Bridge, was once the longest suspension bridge in the world. Today, more than 80 years after its opening, the Benjamin Franklin Bridge remains a key transportation artery and a regional landmark.
    [Show full text]
  • For Immediate Release
    CONTACT: Emma Fried-Cassorla o: (215) 629-3218 c: (215) 313-5582 [email protected] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE RIVERLINK FERRY EXPANDED SERVICE AND SEASON Delaware River Waterfront Corporation to manage RiverLink Ferry System PHILADELPHIA, PA (May 5, 2015): Starting this spring, the Delaware River Waterfront Corporation (DRWC) will assume management of the RiverLink Ferry System providing cross River transportation between the Camden and Philadelphia Waterfronts. The expanded RiverLink Ferry System includes the 517 passenger ferry, Freedom, and at select times throughout the season will include three twenty-two passenger water taxis, creating a comprehensive marine transportation service. It is DRWC’s goal to provide a seamless connection to both sides of the Delaware River to further enhance visitor and resident experiences. DRWC is coordinating with Coopers Ferry Partnership on the Camden Waterfront to market the RiverLink Ferry System, thereby further linking the two neighboring waterfronts. Attractions and partners on both sides of the river including Adventure Aquarium, Battleship NJ, Camden Riversharks, Susquehanna Bank Center, Independence Seaport Museum, Great Plaza at Penn’s Landing and others will help to encourage ridership through cohesive marketing messages. This system will provide a key component for daily visits and all major waterfront festivals and events. Visiting the attractions on both sides will now be quick, efficient and affordable. With the help of its waterfront partners DRWC is committed to providing a quality visitor experience to all users of the ferry service and to help grow attendance at all of the attractions on both the Philadelphia and Camden waterfronts. SCHEDULE May 10th, 15th and 16th concerts at the Susquehanna Bank Center RiverLink Ferry will operate 3 hours before the posted door time and continuing one hour after the concert.
    [Show full text]
  • Green2015-An-Action-Plan-For-The
    Green2015 Advisory Group Conveners and Participating Organizations Michael DiBerardinis, Department of Parks and Recreation Commissioner, co-convener Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, co-convener Amtrak Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future Delaware River Waterfront Corporation Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Fairmount Park Conservancy Fairmount Park Historic Preservation Trust Friends of the Wissahickon Greenspace Alliance Natural Land Trust Neighborhood Gardens Association Next Great City Coalition Office of City Councilman Darrell Clarke Office of Councilwoman Anna Verna Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Environmental Council Pennsylvania Horticultural Society Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations Philadelphia City Planning Commission Philadelphia Department of Commerce Philadelphia Department of Licenses and Inspections Philadelphia Department of Public Health Philadelphia Department of Public Property Philadelphia Department of Revenue Philadelphia Housing Authority Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation Philadelphia Office of Housing and Community Development Philadelphia Office of Sustainability Philadelphia Office of Transportation and Utilities Philadelphia Orchard Project Philadelphia Parks Alliance Philadelphia Parks and Recreation Commission Philadelphia Water Department Redevelopment Authority of Philadelphia School District of Philadelphia Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation
    [Show full text]
  • Building Bridges: Finding New Uses for an Old Viaduct
    Building Bridges Page 1 of 2 send to printer July 22-28, 2004 CITYSPACE Building Bridges Finding new uses for an old viaduct. by W. Kyle Gradinger In the world's most progressive cities, it's fashionable to take the high road. To that end, planners in New York City and Paris are turning abandoned viaducts which once carried railroads above the busy streets below into beautiful downtown TIES TO THE PAST: Students from oases. Part of an abandoned viaduct's appeal is that it provides a large, available Penn and Drexel have gotten tract of land in a city center. As urban living gains in popularity, cities need to create together with Callowhill residents public spaces that are geared for 21st-century lifestyles. to make plans for the Reading Viaduct. Photo By: Michael T. Regan Philadelphia also has a long-forgotten viaduct at Reading Terminal, one that's prime for a new park, affordable housing or even office space. Meanwhile, Paris and New York have already leveraged aging industrial infrastructure to create vibrant new neighborhoods. The Promenade Plantee in Paris is a former railroad viaduct turned city park running several kilometers from the Bastille to the Bois de Vincennes Park on the city's eastern edge. The structure is supported by beautiful brick arches and is now occupied by chic retail stores. Atop the viaduct, a beautiful garden has replaced rusty rails and provided the nearby arrondisements (districts) with a unique and enjoyable public open space offering expansive vistas in the heart of Paris. Since the construction of the Plantee in the early 1990s, the surrounding neighborhood has seen the construction of more than 1,040 new residences, 75,000 square feet of commercial space and 200,000 square feet of office space.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Center City Philadelphia 2021
    STATE OF CENTER CITY PHILADELPHIA 2021 Restoring | Returning | Reanimating Contents Introduction 1 Office 12 Health Care & Higher Education 18 Conventions, Tourism & Hotels 23 Arts & Culture 27 Retail 30 Employment 37 Transportation & Access 47 Downtown Living 53 Developments 62 Acknowledgements 64 Center City District & Central Philadelphia Development Corporation CENTERCITYPHILA.ORG Chapter Name| 1 Reanimating the City District | Center Center of the City Park Dilworth The global pandemic, local stay-at-home mandates and civil boarded-up storefronts and installed new artwork on many. We unrest created extraordinary challenges for all cities. In Center commissioned 200 decorative banners created by Philadelphia City, pedestrian volumes initially plummeted by 72%, as office artists. Our landscape teams planted street trees, filled park workers, hotel guests, regional shoppers, students, theater and flowerbeds with tens of thousands of bulbs and upgraded street restaurant patrons disappeared. At night, streets were devoid of lighting. We continued to provide fee-for-service cleaning for five cars, sidewalks were empty. From the very start in March 2020, adjacent residential neighborhoods. we had all of our on-street and park employees designated To enhance safety, we deployed new bike patrols and security “essential workers.” The central lesson from the Center City vans in afternoons and seven evenings per week, supplement- District’s founding 30 years ago suddenly had renewed reso- ing the role of our Community Service Representatives (CSRs). nance: the revival of economic activity and vitality depends upon In 2020, CSRs had more than 177,000 sustained conversations confidence in a public environment that is clean, safe with pedestrians seeking directions, responding to inquiries and attractive.
    [Show full text]
  • Sit Backand Enjoy the in April and October
    Ferry Season Visiting the Waterfront The ferry runs daily May - September, and Fridays - Sundays Sit back and enjoy the in April and October. There’s even express evening service for Tweeter Center concerts. For information, call (215) 925-LINK is a Breeze with or visit www.riverlinkferry.org. RiverLink Ferry the fun, fast and easy way to begin the RiverLink Ferry Departure Times family adventures, concerts and celebrations at Penn’s Landing and the Camden Waterfront. From Philadelphia: From Camden: Ticket Information How to get to the ferry - 9:20 AM Purchase tickets at the Penn’s Landing and Camden In Philadelphia, the ferry dock is at Walnut Street & 9:40 AM 10:00 AM Waterfront ticket booth locations. Tickets are also available Columbus Boulevard at Penn’s Landing. Take Phlash, 10:20 AM 10:40 AM at the Independence Visitor Center. Visa and MasterCard Philadelphia Trolley Works, Big Bus or SEPTA’s bus 21 or 42 11:00 AM 11:20 AM accepted, with a $15.00 minimum purchase. to Penn’s Landing. 11:40 AM 12:00 PM 12:20 PM 12:40 PM Roundtrip RiverLink Ferry Fares In Camden, the ferry dock is behind Adventure Aquarium. 1:00 PM 1:20 PM Adults $6.00 / Children (3 yrs. to 12 yrs.) $5.00 Take PATCO High Speed Line, River LINE or NJ Transit for access Senior Citizens (age 65 and up) $5.00 / Groups of 15 or more $4.50* to the Camden Waterfront. 1:40 PM 2:00 PM *(When booked 10 days in advance. Call 215-925-LINK.) 2:20 PM 2:40 PM Phlash Downtown 3:00 PM 3:20 PM See more of the waterfront with these exciting packages Phlash is the quick, inexpensive and easy connection for 3:40 PM 4:00 PM Packages may be purchased at any of the participating 19 key destinations, including most downtown hotels, between attractions’ ticket booths.
    [Show full text]
  • The Recommended FY2015-2020 Capital Program
    The Recommended FY2015 -2020 Capital Program City of Philadelphia Philadelphia becomes one of the safest cities in America • The education and health of Philadelphians improve Philadelphia is a place of choice • Philadelphia becomes the greenest and most sustainable city in America Philadelphia government works efficiently and effectively, with integrity and responsiveness City of Philadelphia: The Recommended FY2015-2020 Capital Program City of Philadelphia Michael A. Nutter, Mayor Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development Philadelphia City Planning Commission Alan Greenberger, FAIA, Chairman Joseph Syrnick, Vice Chairman Rob Dubow Patrick Eiding Bernard Lee, Esq. Elizabeth K. Miller Richard Negrin Nilda Iris Ruiz, MBA Nancy Rogo Trainer, AIA, AICP Gary J. Jastrzab, Executive Director Thanks go to our colleagues… Alan S. Urek, AICP, Deputy Executive Director Jeannette Brugger, AICP, PP Office of Budget and Program Evaluation John Haak, AICP Rebecca Rhynhart, Budget Director Jametta Johnson Nicole McCormac, Deputy Budget Director, Capital Clint Randall Randy Milbourne Anthony M. Santaniello Meredith Quick Deborah Schaaf Thomas Tartack Mark Wheeler, GISP Tavare Brown Department of Public Property, Capital One Parkway Building Projects Division th 1515 Arch Street, 13 Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 215.683.4615 www.phila.gov/cityplanning www.phila2035.org February 28, 2014 City of Philadelphia: The Recommended FY2015-2020 Capital Program Table of Contents Highlights of the Recommended FY2015-2020 Capital Program 1 Sources of
    [Show full text]
  • Request for Proposals for a Feasibility Analysis Study
    CENTER CITY GREENWAY CONNECTIONS Request for Proposals For a Feasibility Analysis Study Release Date: August 10, 2007 Submission Date: September 28, 2007 Center City Greenway Connections RFP TABLE OF CONTENTS: I. GENERAL INFORMATION.............................................................................................................1 Proposal Requirements and RFP Conditions ...........................................................................................1 II. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................3 III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION...............................................................................................5 History – East Coast Greenway..................................................................................................................5 Existing and Upcoming Segments of the Greenway in Philadelphia....................................................6 List of Potential Alignments........................................................................................................................9 IV. PROJECT GOALS ...........................................................................................................................15 V. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES.....................................................................16 VI. PROJECT MANAGEMENT, EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SELECTION PROCESS.........................................................................................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Writing the Viaduct at the Heart of Her Life and Art
    The Viaduct At The Heart Of Her Life And Art By Nathaniel Popkin Published: October 29, 2013 Sarah McEneaney, Trestletown North From Goldtex (2013) Amidst the precise geometry of the the streets and buildings in Sarah McEneaney’s painting Trestletown, North From Goldtex (2013), the Reading Viaduct stretches out like a limber dog, its thick fox-like tail hugging the industrial landscape. Sarah herself is there, standing on the SEPTA spur (the dog’s neck), as she often is, with John Struble, with whom she founded the Reading Viaduct Project in 2003, and her 12 year old dog Trixie. In the painting, McEneaney and Struble are studying design plans for the spur, which starting next year will become a park, the first hint that McEneaney and Struble’s dream to transform the train trestle, out of service since 1984, will become reality. The painting is one of 14 that comprise “Trestletown,” McEneaney’s second solo show at Locks Gallery on Washington Square, an homage to the Viaduct and its place in the domestic landscape of the painter’s life. On Friday, Locks will host an opening reception for the show, which runs until 600 Washington Square South Philadelphia PA 19106 tel 215.629.1000 fax 215.629.3868 [email protected] www.locksgallery.com Sarah McEneaney, Twighlight (2012) November 23, and a panel discussion on the Viaduct, “Rethinking Trestletown,” November 21 at 6PM. The show comes directly on the heels of the merger of the Reading Viaduct Project and Friends of the Rail Park (the joint organization will be called, going forward, Friends of the Rail Park, though it will retain the decade-long history of RVP), and together, the show and merger allow us to recognize McEneaney for her vision and leadership: without her, there would be no hope of transforming the Viaduct into an imaginative public space.
    [Show full text]
  • News News News
    PDE Logos in 4-Color Process THIS IS THE NEW LOGO IN THIS ISSUE ESTUARY Go50th Anniversary Wild! of the Estuary: ANational Estuary Program Newsletter of the Partnership for Delaware Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Symbol Alone PAGE 8 Logo with stacked type Type Alone Living Our Lives by the Tides | PAGE 4 Wild About Cumberland | PAGE 11 Birding in the Estuary | PAGE 12 Young osprey calling from nest NEWS CREDIT: Lynn Maun, Great Egg Harbor Watershed Association The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary SUMMERSUMMER 20182018 Connecting people, science, and nature for a healthy Delaware River and Bay VOL. 28 | NO. 23 DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE The Delaware River billion in the watershed each year. And it’s one may not be the first of the best ways for organizations like PDE and place that comes to those in the Alliance for Watershed Education mind for wilderness. (see page 14) to connect people to our work for But think again! This clean water and a healthy environment. year’s 50th anniversary So if you find yourself feeling guilty about of the National Wild and taking an afternoon off for a little time outdoors, Scenic Rivers Program don’t. It’s good for your body and mind, not to is a reminder that you mention the economy and the environment. So, don’t have to go far enjoy! S to go wild. There are a number of Wild and Scenic Rivers in the Estuary focus area, each with its own unique Jennifer A. Adkins draw (see page 8). All offer amazing wilderness Executive Director experiences not far from home.
    [Show full text]
  • Camden County Smart Growth Transit Analysis
    Camden County Smart Growth Transit Analysis prepared for: The Senator Walter Rand Institute, The City of Camden, Camden County Board of Freeholders, and The Greater Camden Partnership prepared by: Voorhees Transportation Policy Institute Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey December 2002 Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Transportation Opportunities and Constraints in the Camden Hub This report explores the potential for smart growth opportunities in the Camden Hub (the city of Camden and thirteen surrounding municipalities). Its purpose is to propose a transit-based redevelopment strategy that will promote sustainable development at both the local and regional levels within the Camden Hub. The Camden Hub possesses a number of public transit assets — PATCO Speedline (PATCO), the NJ Transit Atlantic City line, and the NJ Transit bus system — as well as the Southern New Jersey Light Rail Transit System (SNJLRTS) which will soon be opened for service, which could be capitalized on to better serve the development needs of the city of Camden and the surrounding region. These transit assets could provide an essential framework for the targeting of economic development and the revitalization of the city of Camden as a job, residential and recreation center. At the outset, the paper will briefly describe the experience of Jersey City, another city across the river from a major central business district, which has experienced smart growth development focused around its public transit assets. While there are many differences between the situations of Jersey City and Camden, valuable lessons can be learned from Jersey City that could be applicable to Camden’s circumstances.
    [Show full text]