DOCSLIB.ORG

Transportation Matters and Why Do We Need It?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transportation Matters and Why Do We Need It? South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization 782 South Brewster Road, Unit B6 2016 UPDATE TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Vineland, New Jersey 08361 FINAL JULY 25, 2016 WWW.SJTPO.ORG www.sjtpo.org South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization CONTENTS Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Appendices.............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization Policy Board ........................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 About SJTPO .............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 What is Transportation Matters and Why Do We Need It? ................................................................................................... 6 Study Area ................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Plan Requirements –the FAST Act ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Regional Demographics and Economic Context ..................................................................................................................... 10 2. The Plan Vision and Goals ........................................................................................................................................... 16 Our Vision ................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 Goals and Strategies .................................................................................................................................................................. 16 3. Public Involvement ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 Online Efforts ............................................................................................................................................................................ 20 Outreach Events ........................................................................................................................................................................ 21 Input Received........................................................................................................................................................................... 24 4. The Region’s Existing Transportation System and Select Strategies .............................................................................. 27 1. Aviation .................................................................................................................................................................................. 27 2. Bicycle and Pedestrian System ............................................................................................................................................. 29 3. Freight .................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 4. Public Transportation ........................................................................................................................................................... 52 5. Human Service Transportation ............................................................................................................................................ 60 6. Roadway System .................................................................................................................................................................... 64 5. Safety ................................................................................................................................................................................. 71 Statewide Strategic Highway Safety Plan .................................................................................................................................. 71 Making our Infrastructure Safer ............................................................................................................................................... 72 Educating for Safer Behavior .................................................................................................................................................... 73 Opportunities to Expand on Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Awareness ................................................................................. 76 Moving Safety Forward ............................................................................................................................................................. 76 2 | Chapter 1 Transportation Matters – A Plan for South Jersey 6. Environmental Considerations .......................................................................................................................................... 78 Regional Environmental Context ............................................................................................................................................. 78 New Jersey’s Progress to Date .................................................................................................................................................. 81 7. Scenarios ........................................................................................................................................................................... 84 Demographics ........................................................................................................................................................................... 84 Scenario Development ............................................................................................................................................................. 86 Subarea (Project-level) Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 89 8. Financial Plan .................................................................................................................................................................... 98 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................. 98 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) ......................................................................................................................... 98 Federal Funding Sources for SJTPO ..................................................................................................................................... 100 State Highway and Transit Funding ....................................................................................................................................... 105 Investment Package – Future Year Build Scenario (Business as Usual) .............................................................................. 106 Major Issues Facing Transportation in South Jersey ............................................................................................................ 111 9. System Performance ........................................................................................................................................................ 115 MAP-21 Update ..................................................................................................................................................................... 115 National Goals Areas and Performance Measures ............................................................................................................... 115 Six Elements Interconnected ................................................................................................................................................. 118 An Overview of the SJTPO Performance-Based Planning Process ..................................................................................... 119 APPENDICES A. List of Projects B. Air Quality Conformity Determination C. Demographic Forecasts D. FY 2016 Congestion Management Process (CMP) Activity Report E. Public Involvement F. Environmental Justice Report--Transportation Matters Update G. System Performance Reports H. List of Acronyms I. Federal Requirements Checklist Chapter 1 | 3 www.sjtpo.org South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization’s (SJTPO’s) Transportation Matters – A Plan for South Jersey was produced
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RAILROAD COMMUNICATIONS Amtrak
    RAILROAD COMMUNICATIONS Amtrak Amtrak Police Department (APD) Frequency Plan Freq Input Chan Use Tone 161.295 R (160.365) A Amtrak Police Dispatch 71.9 161.295 R (160.365) B Amtrak Police Dispatch 100.0 161.295 R (160.365) C Amtrak Police Dispatch 114.8 161.295 R (160.365) D Amtrak Police Dispatch 131.8 161.295 R (160.365) E Amtrak Police Dispatch 156.7 161.295 R (160.365) F Amtrak Police Dispatch 94.8 161.295 R (160.365) G Amtrak Police Dispatch 192.8 161.295 R (160.365) H Amtrak Police Dispatch 107.2 161.205 (simplex) Amtrak Police Car-to-Car Primary 146.2 160.815 (simplex) Amtrak Police Car-to-Car Secondary 146.2 160.830 R (160.215) Amtrak Police CID 123.0 173.375 Amtrak Police On-Train Use 203.5 Amtrak Police Area Repeater Locations Chan Location A Wilmington, DE B Morrisville, PA C Philadelphia, PA D Gap, PA E Paoli, PA H Race Amtrak Police 10-Codes 10-0 Emergency Broadcast 10-21 Call By Telephone 10-1 Receiving Poorly 10-22 Disregard 10-2 Receiving Well 10-24 Alarm 10-3 Priority Service 10-26 Prepare to Copy 10-4 Affirmative 10-33 Does Not Conform to Regulation 10-5 Repeat Message 10-36 Time Check 10-6 Busy 10-41 Begin Tour of Duty 10-7 Out Of Service 10-45 Accident 10-8 Back In Service 10-47 Train Protection 10-10 Vehicle/Person Check 10-48 Vandalism 10-11 Request Additional APD Units 10-49 Passenger/Patron Assist 10-12 Request Supervisor 10-50 Disorderly 10-13 Request Local Jurisdiction Police 10-77 Estimated Time of Arrival 10-14 Request Ambulance or Rescue Squad 10-82 Hostage 10-15 Request Fire Department 10-88 Bomb Threat 10-16
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Development Strategic Plan Salem County, New Jersey 2014-2017
    Economic Development Strategic Plan 2014 - 2017 Economic Development Strategic Plan Salem County, New Jersey 2014-2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. Executive Summary ………………………………………………… 2 II. Introduction...…………………………………………………...……. 3 III. Location and History of Salem County …………………………… 4 IV. County Demographics and Statistics …………………………..... 5 V. County Infrastructure ………………………………………………. 6 VI. Available Land and Buildings ………………………………..……. 7 VII. Redevelopment Opportunities …………………………………….. 7 VIII. S.W.O.T. Analysis ………………………………………………….. 7 IX. Priority Projects ……………………………………………………... 15 X. Implementation Plan ……………………………………………….. 21 XI. Plan Updating Process …………………………………………….. 24 XII. Appendix …………………………………………………………….. 24 Economic Development Strategic Plan Salem County, New Jersey 2014 – 2017 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Salem County Improvement Authority (SCIA), In conjunction with the County of Salem (the County), has developed this new Economic Development Strategic Plan to serve as a guide or “playbook” in the undertaking of a focused and coordinated program of economic development throughout the County of Salem, New Jersey. This new economic development strategic plan builds upon previous economic development strategic plans and in particular the current plan developed by the SCIA in 2010. In the past four years since the last plan was prepared and adopted by the County and the SCIA, social and economic forces have again shifted, mostly in a positive direction, since the previous plan was developed when the nation and the County were suffering from the economic downturn generally referred to as “The Great Recession”. This new strategic economic development plan focuses on guiding the County’s economic development program to take advantage of an expected rebounding international, national, State and local economy. Salem County has distinct competitive advantages for the certain business and industries based upon its location, affordable land costs, infrastructure and labor force.
    [Show full text]
  • New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN %FDFNCFS
    New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN %FDFNCFS Table of CONTENTS Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the Author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Federal Highway Administration. New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN Page left blank intentionally. Table of CONTENTS Acknowledgements The New Jersey Department of Transportation’s Division of Multimodal Services thanks the many organizations and individuals for their time and contribution in making this document possible. New Jersey Department of Transportation Nicole Minutoli Paul Truban Genevieve Clifton Himanshu Patel Andrew Ludasi New Jersey Freight Advisory Committee Calvin Edghill, FHWA Keith Skilton, FHWA Anne Strauss-Wieder, NJTPA Jakub Rowinski, NJTPA Ted Dahlburg, DVRPC Mike Ruane, DVRPC Bill Schiavi, SJTPO David Heller, SJTPO Steve Brown, PANYNJ Victoria Farr, PANYNJ Stephanie Molden, PANYNJ Alan Kearns, NJ TRANSIT Steve Mazur, SJTA Rodney Oglesby, CSX Rick Crawford, Norfolk Southern Michael Fesen, Norfolk Southern Jocelyn Hill, Conrail Adam Baginski, Conrail Kelvin MacKavanagh, New Jersey Short Line Railroad Association Brian Hare, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation David Rosenberg, New York State Department of Transportation Consultant Team Jennifer Grenier, WSP Stephen Chiaramonte, WSP Alan Meyers, WSP Carlos Bastida, WSP Joseph Bryan, WSP Sebastian Guerrero, WSP Debbie Hartman, WSP Ruchi Shrivastava, WSP Reed Sibley, WSP Scudder Smith, WSP Scott Parker, Jacobs Engineering Jayne Yost, Jacobs Engineering
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Salem Corridor Freight Rail Intermodal Study. South
    Port of Salem Corridor Freight Rail Intermodal Study Final Report South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization May 2018 ii Port of Salem Corridor Study Port of Salem Corridor Freight Rail Intermodal Study South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization Jennifer Marandino, PE, Executive Director William Schiavi, Project Manager Consultant Team AECOM Envision Consultants iii Port of Salem Corridor Study Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 6 II. PREVIOUS STUDIES .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 III. CURRENT CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 8 IV. OUTREACH ................................................................................................................................................................... 12 V. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 13 APPENDICES A. Review of Previous Studies B. Summary of Field Work C. Summary of Outreach
    [Show full text]
  • Safe Transit in Shared Use, F T a Report 0008
    Safe Transit in Shared Use JULY 2011 FTA Report No. 0008 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Alfred E. Fazio, PE A. R. Troup Bridget Hodgeson Jack Kanarek SYSTRA Consulting, Inc. Philadelphia, PA COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Alfred E. Fazio of BRT Services DISCLAIMER This document is intended as a technical assistance product. It is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. SYSTRA Consulting, Inc. is an EEO/AA/Title VI/Title IX/Section 504/ADA/ADEA employer and actively seeks to diversify its work force. Safe Transit in Shared Use JULY 2011 FTA Report No. 0008 PREPARED BY SYSTRA Consulting, Inc. 1600 Market St., Ste 1310 Philadelphia, PA 19103 in Association with BRT Services, LLC http://www.fta.dot.gov/research SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE http://www.fta.dot.gov/research FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION I Metric Conversion Table Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Trips, Excursions, Special Journeys, Outings, Tours, and Milestones In, To, from Or Through New Jersey
    TRANSPORTATION TRIPS, EXCURSIONS, SPECIAL JOURNEYS, OUTINGS, TOURS, AND MILESTONES IN, TO, FROM OR THROUGH NEW JERSEY Bill McKelvey, Editor, Updated to Mon., Mar. 8, 2021 INTRODUCTION This is a reference work which we hope will be useful to historians and researchers. For those researchers wanting to do a deeper dive into the history of a particular event or series of events, copious resources are given for most of the fantrips, excursions, special moves, etc. in this compilation. You may find it much easier to search for the RR, event, city, etc. you are interested in than to read the entire document. We also think it will provide interesting, educational, and sometimes entertaining reading. Perhaps it will give ideas to future fantrip or excursion leaders for trips which may still be possible. In any such work like this there is always the question of what to include or exclude or where to draw the line. Our first thought was to limit this work to railfan excursions, but that soon got broadened to include rail specials for the general public and officials, special moves, trolley trips, bus outings, waterway and canal journeys, etc. The focus has been on such trips which operated within NJ; from NJ; into NJ from other states; or, passed through NJ. We have excluded regularly scheduled tourist type rides, automobile journeys, air trips, amusement park rides, etc. NOTE: Since many of the following items were taken from promotional literature we can not guarantee that each and every trip was actually operated. Early on the railways explored and promoted special journeys for the public as a way to improve their bottom line.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Commerce in Greater Philadelphia
    MARITIME COMMERCE IN GREATER PHILADELPHIA Assessing Industry Trends and Growth Opportunities for Delaware River Ports July 2008 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Maritime Commerce In Greater Philadelphia Executive Summary 3 Introduction and Project Partners 8 Section 1: Economic Impact Analysis 9 Section 2: Delaware River Port Descriptions & Key Competitors 12 Section 3: Global Trends and Implications for Delaware River Ports 24 Section 4: Strategies and Scenarios for Future Growth 31 Section 5: Conclusions and Key Recommendations 38 Appendices Appendix A: Glossary 40 Appendix B: History of the Delaware River Ports 42 Appendix C: Methodology for Economic Impact Analysis 46 Appendix D: Port-Reliant Employment 48 Appendix E: Excerpts from Expert Panel Discussions 49 Appendix F: Port Profiles 55 Appendix G: Additional Data 57 Appendix H: Delaware River Port Maps 62 Appendix I: End Notes 75 Appendix J: Resources 76 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary For more than 300 years, the from origin to final destination. supports 12,121 jobs and $772 mil- Delaware River has served as a key ⇒ Implications for Delaware lion in labor income, generating $2.4 commercial highway for the region. River Ports. The region has ca- billion in economic output. While Greater Philadelphia’s mari- pacity to accommodate growth, The port industry’s regional job time roots remain, rapid globalization but its ports must collaborate to base is relatively small, but those jobs and technological advances are driv- develop a comprehensive plan generate higher than average income ing an industry-wide transformation that addresses existing con- and output per job. Regional direct that has impacted the role that Dela- straints and rationally allocates jobs represent an average annual in- ware River ports play in the larger cargo based on competitive ad- come (including fringe benefits) of economy.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Salem Harbor Plan Substitution Summary 122 Table 3: 2008 Salem Harbor Plan Amplification Summary 123
    SALEM HARBOR PLAN The City of Salem, Massachusetts Mayor Kimberley Driscoll January 2008 Fort Point Associates, Inc TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii 2008 UPDATE OVERVIEW iv I. SUMMARY Introduction 1 The Vision 1 II. INTRODUCTION Overview 4 The Harbor Planning Area 4 The Planning Process 6 A Guide to the Planning Recommendations 9 III. FRAMEWORK FOR PLANNING Summary of Existing Conditions 13 Goals and Objectives 20 IV. PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS Area-Wide Recommendations 24 South Commercial Waterfront 38 Tourist Historic Harbor 49 North Commercial Waterfront 56 Industrial Port 60 Community Waterfront 63 V. IMPLEMENTATION Oversight and Responsibilities 71 Economic Development 76 Phasing Strategy 78 Resources 80 Implementation - Summary of Proposed Actions 88 VI. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT Overview: Chapter 91 100 Activities Subject to Chapter 91 102 Designated Port Area 103 Authority of the Salem Harbor Plan and DPA Master Plan 104 Guidance to DEP: Substitute Provisions 105 Guidance To DEP: Non-substitute Provisions 111 Other Local and Federal Regulations and Permits 117 Substitution and Amplification Tables 122 VII. FUTURE PLANNING 124 i APPENDICES A. PUBLIC INPUT - STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS B. RECENTLY OR SOON TO BE COMPETED REPORTS Salem Open Space and Recreation Plan (2007) Winter Island Barracks Building Feasibility Reuse Study (Jul 2007) Downtown Salem Retail Market Study: Strategy and Action Plan (May 2007) Salem Wharf Expansion Plan (expected early 2008) C. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT D. BATHYMETRIC
    [Show full text]
  • Rail & Road to Recovery
    RAIL & ROAD TO RECOVERY April 2020 Tri-State Transportation Campaign BlueWaveNJ Clean Water Action Environment New Jersey New Jersey Policy Perspective New Jersey Sierra Club SUMMARY Transit and environmental advocates strongly oppose the New Jersey Turnpike Authority’s unprecedented 2020 Capital Plan, which will direct $16 billion toward road expansion projects. The $24 billion capital plan calls for more than 50 major projects to be undertaken on the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway in rolling, five-year increments. Thirteen of these projects will ultimately widen over 100 miles of roadway on the Turnpike and Parkway, and none of the projects would allow for any transit expansion or incorporate a transit component. This proposed capital program directly contradicts the state’s Energy Master Plan, released in January after a year-long process, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition the state to 100% clean energy sources by 2050, with an emphasis on expanding public transportation options and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). In contrast, Rail and Road to Recovery, our alternative capital plan, highlights 27 unfunded mass transit projects totaling over $25.8 billion that would create 1.28 million jobs that should be funded with the $16 billion currently slated for highway expansion. NJTA’s plan also doesn’t take getting the state’s roads and bridges into a state of good repair seriously --36% of the state’s highways are deficient (rough and/or distressed), 529 bridges are structurally deficient and 2,367 are in need of repair. The price tag for unfunded fix-it-first projects is over $10 billion --at least $8.6 billion for bridges and $679 million for just the top 500 state road projects over the next few years, which doesn’t even include needed repairs to the far larger network of local and county roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of State Funding Practices for Coastal Port Infrastructure Final Report
    Survey of State Funding Practices for Coastal Port Infrastructure Final Report PRC 15-51-F Survey of State Funding Practices for Coastal Port Infrastructure Texas A&M Transportation Institute PRC 15-51-F May 2015 Author C. James Kruse Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 6 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 6 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction/Background........................................................................................................... 11 Nature of Capital Investment at Ports ....................................................................................... 11 Status of Texas Ports ................................................................................................................. 11 Purpose of Report ...................................................................................................................... 11 Report Content .......................................................................................................................... 12 Texas............................................................................................................................................. 13 Texas Port System ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 Annual Report South Jersey Port Corporation
    2005 SOUTH JERSEY ANNUAL REPORT PORT CORPORATION 2005 ANNUAL REPORT SJPC CONTENTS Chairman’s Letter 1 Board of Directors 2 2005 Overview 4 Port Facilities 9 Port Management & Staff 13 Financial Statements 14 2005 ANNUAL REPORT SJPC TO THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE The South Jersey Port Corporation (SJPC), perhaps GOVERNOR JON S. CORZINE uniquely among agencies of the State of New Jersey, is both a public servant and a business. That’s why it is gratifying to report to you that, during 2005, the SJPC served the public of New Jersey and of the South Jersey region so well with effective business management and planning, as it once again achieved a combined record level of business at the Ports of Camden and Salem. Importantly, while the SJPC At the Port of Salem, the SJPC achieved record cargo tonnage levels welcomed a principal new tenant. for the third consecutive year and National Docks is a sand and gravel installed and implemented the use of business that brought 90,000 tons of important new infrastructure at the material through the port in just six Port of Camden, the port corporation months of operation during 2005. made important strides forward with Importantly, this new tenant brings long- planning for development of a fourth term stability to the state’s southernmost port in South Jersey at Paulsboro. port. In a development to sustain the Combined cargo totals at Camden viability of the port, the Salem River and Salem during 2005 topped 3.5 channel deepening from 12 feet to 16 million tons, a healthy 3.5 percent feet in a project was funded jointly from increase over 2004, with leading state and federal resources.
    [Show full text]
  • East Coast Marine Highway Report
    EAST COAST MARINE HIGHWAY INITIATIVE M-95 STUDY FINAL REPORT October 2013 PREPARED FOR: East Coast Marine Highway Initiative Awarding Authority New Bedford Harbor Development Commission Maryland Port Administration New Jersey Department of Transportation Canaveral Port Authority I-95 Corridor Coalition DISCLAIMER AND LIMITATIONS This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the East Coast Marine Highway Initiative Awarding Authority, a cooperative formed between the ports of New Bedford, Baltimore and Canaveral, the New Jersey Department of Transportation, and the I-95 Corridor Coalition. The cooperative agreement was funded by the U.S. Maritime Administration. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are those of the researchers and staff, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any government agencies or organizations that funded the study. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Certain forward-looking statements are based upon interpretations or assessments of best available information at the time of writing. Actual events may differ from those assumed, and events are subject to change. Findings are time-sensitive and relevant only to current conditions at the time of writing. Factors influencing the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements may exist that are outside of the purview of the consulting firm. Parsons Brinckerhoff’s report is thus to be viewed as an assessment that is time-relevant, specifically referring to conditions at the time of review. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party's use or the results of such use of any information contained in this document in whole or in part.
    [Show full text]