DOCSLIB.ORG

Transit Villages in New Jersey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transit Villages in New Jersey Evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative Executive Summary Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers University December 2003 www.policy.rutgers.edu/vtc/tod/transitvillages Executive Summary Introduction Background From September 2002 to October 2003, the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center1 The Transit Village Initiative is a program that (VTC) at Rutgers University conducted an seeks to revitalize and grow selected evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village communities with transit as an anchor. Initiative, funded by the New Jersey Although the Transit Village Initiative is Department of Transportation (NJDOT). As staffed and directed by the New Jersey part of this evaluation, VTC has produced the Department of Transportation, a Task Force of following reports in our assessment of the representatives from several state agencies Initiative: meets regularly to guide the Initiative. The participating agencies are: · State of the Literature: Transit-Oriented Development · New Jersey Department of Transportation · Demographics of the New Jersey Transit · New Jersey Department of Environmental Villages Protection · Transit Villages in New Jersey: Success · New Jersey Redevelopment Authority Factors, Obstacles, and Recommendations · New Jersey Transit · Transit Villages in New Jersey: · New Jersey Department of Community Recommendations for Assessment and Affairs Accountability - Office of Smart Growth - MainStreet New Jersey In addition to these written reports, a · New Jersey Economic Development symposium was held at the Edward J. Authority Bloustein School of Planning and Public · New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Policy, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Finance Agency New Jersey, on October 10, 2003, to release · New Jersey Commerce & Economic our findings. All the materials from the Growth Commission symposium, including the PowerPoint · New Jersey Council on the Arts presentation, and all the written reports can be downloaded at: Within each agency, at least one person has www.policy.rutgers.edu/vtc/tod/ been appointed the Transit Village transitvillages. representative. Each municipality also has a contact person who works directly with this This Executive Summary highlights the major representative, in addition to working with the findings of the evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village coordinator at NJDOT. The Transit Village Initiative. benefit of being a Transit Village is that this designation not only gives these municipalities priority for state grants but also allows the municipalities to have direct contact with the representatives of these agencies. This is 1 Originally, transportation policy studies were carried often helpful in expediting development out under the name Transportation Policy Institute approvals. (TPI) as part of the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center (VTC). As of September 2003, TPI is no longer The Transit Village is designated as the half- an active entity and all research activity is encompassed mile area around the transit facility (this is by the VTC designation. Evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative 1 Executive Summary also typically referred to as a transit-oriented practice manner, but the Brookings report development area). The Transit Village begins to outline necessary goals and Initiative fits into the larger smart growth objectives for a coherent public vision. agenda in New Jersey because it helps to The California report takes the Brookings promote the growth of businesses and report’s recommendations and develops a residential population around existing (or model of state policy to promote TOD. planned, in one case) transportation 3. It is necessary to develop a typology and infrastructure investments. Its aim is to guidelines for success: Although TOD is reduce traffic congestion and improve air subject to local market constraints, it is quality by promoting increased transit necessary to develop a system for ridership, pedestrian activity, and bicycle use. classifying different places and then In addition, the goals of economic creating guidelines for success. Future revitalization and increasing the housing stock TODs should learn from the successes are part of an overall effort to create vibrant, and/or failures of the past—it is necessary enjoyable, and exciting areas around major to define obstacles to success, especially in transit nodes. a local context. 4. Housing, parking, and financing need State of the Literature: Transit-Oriented special attention: All three of these Development (December 2002) reports identify the importance of housing, parking, and financing for TODs. These A literature review was conducted as the first issues need to be worked on in a general task in our evaluation. This report was a sense, again to develop guidelines for meta-review of three literature reviews about success, but they also need to be addressed transit-oriented development (TOD). We in a local context for each new project. summarize Transit Oriented Development: 5. Measuring and evaluating success is Moving from Rhetoric to Reality (Belzer and necessary: To ensure that TODs are Autler 2002) by the Brookings Institution, successful, a process of evaluation is Transit Oriented Development and Joint important to discern how well goals are Development in the United States: A being realized. As is stated in the TCRP Literature Review (Cervero, Ferrell, and report, most TODs in the United States are Murphy 2002) by the Transit Cooperative so new that adequate data have not yet Research Program (TCRP), and Statewide been collected to evaluate their success. Transit-Oriented Development Study: Factors for Success in California (California Demographics of the New Jersey Transit Department of Transportation 2002). Villages (October 2003) Our general conclusions are: The goal of the demographics analysis was to understand the unique character of each 1. Collaboration is key: To successfully Transit Village and to determine if there were build a TOD, it is vital not only for public any patterns across the municipalities. Our and private sectors to work together but findings reveal three typologies across the also for different levels of government and seven municipalities.2 We found similarities different agencies across government to cooperate. 2 Metuchen was not included in this analysis because it 2. Public policies are lacking: The TCRP did not receive the Transit Village Designation until report discusses case studies in a best- December 2002, which was after the start of this evaluation. Evaluation of the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative 2 Executive Summary among the Traditional Bedroom Communities · Rental vacancy rate goes up in all of Morristown, Rutherford, and South Orange. Villages, but only in Pleasantville does it Rahway and South Amboy are characterized get critically high as Urban, Industrial-Based Communities, and · In terms of percentages, there are more Pleasantville and Riverside are the South households without cars in all Villages Jersey, Non-Commuter Rail Communities. · In terms of percentages, there are fewer households with 3 or more cars in all Furthermore, in general, the characteristics of Villages the Transit Village (the half-mile area around · A higher percentage of workers in the the transit station) shift from the municipal Transit Village use mass transit profile with remarkable consistency: · A higher percentage of workers walk to work in all Villages except South Orange · School-age population percentage goes up in the Transit Village (except in South To summarize: Transit Villages in New Orange and Rutherford) Jersey feature a younger population, more · Senior population percentage drops in the racial and ethnic diversity, more Transit Village (except in South Orange immigrants, lower household economics, and Rutherford, where it increases) more singles, more rental housing, higher · White non-Hispanic population level goes vacancy rates, and better transit habits— down in the Transit Village (except in fewer cars, more use of trains and buses, South Orange, where it increases) and more residents walking to work. · Hispanic levels increase in all Transit Villages except South Orange Transit Villages in New Jersey: Success · Foreign-born population percentage Factors, Obstacles, and Recommendations increases in all the Transit Villages except (October 2003) South Amboy · Married couple households drop in share This report presents the findings of in-depth in the Transit Villages except in Riverside interviews with stakeholders, including state and South Amboy officials, municipal officials, and private · Female single parent households in all the developers. The following bulleted items Transit Villages stay at about the same summarize each of the success factors, level as in the municipalities obstacles, and recommendations: · Single-person households increase in share in all Villages Success Factors · Poverty rate goes up in all Villages except South Orange, where it stays the same State Government · Unemployment levels go up in all Transit · A Task Force that meets regularly with Villages except Morristown and Riverside designated agency representatives to · Single-family housing stock drops in monitor progress in the designated percentage in all Transit Villages except municipalities, to discuss problems, and Pleasantville propose solutions · Homeownership rate drops in all Transit · Engaged Task Force members who help Villages, except
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Housing Diversity and Affordability in New
    HOUSING DIVERSITY AND AFFORDABILITY IN NEW JERSEY’S TRANSIT VILLAGES By Dorothy Morallos Mabel Smith Honors Thesis Douglass College Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey April 11, 2006 Written under the direction of Professor Jan S. Wells Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy ABSTRACT New Jersey’s Transit Village Initiative is a major policy initiative, administered by the New Jersey Department of Transportation that promotes the concept of transit oriented development (TOD) by revitalizing communities and promoting residential and commercial growth around transit centers. Several studies have been done on TODs, but little research has been conducted on the effects it has on housing diversity and affordability within transit areas. This research will therefore evaluate the affordable housing situation in relation to TODs in within a statewide context through the New Jersey Transit Village Initiative. Data on the affordable housing stock of 16 New Jersey Transit Villages were gathered for this research. Using Geographic Information Systems Software (GIS), the locations of these affordable housing sites were mapped and plotted over existing pedestrian shed maps of each Transit Village. Evaluations of each designated Transit Village’s efforts to encourage or incorporate inclusionary housing were based on the location and availability of affordable developments, as well as the demographic character of each participating municipality. Overall, findings showed that affordable housing remains low amongst all the designated villages. However, new rules set forth by the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) may soon change these results and the overall affordable housing stock within the whole state.
    [Show full text]
  • The Zoning and Real Estate Implications of Transit-Oriented Development
    TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration LEGAL RESEARCH DIGEST January 1999--Number 12 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Subject Areas: IA Planning and Administration, IC Transportation Law, VI Public Transit, and VII Rail The Zoning and Real Estate Implications of Transit-Oriented Development This report was prepared under TCRP Project J-5, "Legal Aspects of Transit and Intermodal Transportation Programs, "for which the Transportation Research Board is the agency coordinating the research. The report was prepared by S. Mark White. James B. McDaniel, TRB Counsel for Legal Research Projects, was the principal investigator and content editor. THE PROBLEM AND ITS SOLUTION transit-equipment and operations guidelines, FTA financing initiatives, private-sector programs, and The nation's transit agencies need to have access labor or environmental standards relating to transit to a program that can provide authoritatively operations. Emphasis is placed on research of current researched, specific, limited-scope studies of legal importance and applicability to transit and intermodal issues and problems having national significance and operations and programs. application to their businesses. The TCRP Project J-5 is designed to provide insight into the operating APPLICATIONS practices and legal elements of specific problems in transportation agencies. Local government officials, including attorneys, The intermodal approach to surface planners, and urban design professionals, are seeking transportation requires a partnership between transit new approaches to land use and development that and other transportation modes. To make the will address environmental impacts of increased partnership work well, attorneys for each mode need automobile traffic and loss of open space around to be familiar with the legal framework and processes cities and towns, and alleviate financial pressures on of the other modes.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Village Symposium: “Progress and Future”
    ‘ Progress and Future’ 2nd Transit Village Symposium Summary of Proceedings sponsored by: Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy and New Jersey Department of Transportation with support from The New Jersey State League of Municipalities September 2006 “Progress and Future” — 2nd Transit Village Symposium, June 9, 2006 Executive Summary n Friday, June 9, 2006, more than 150 invited leaders from the public sector, private industry and O non-governmental organizations gathered in New Brunswick to take stock in New Jersey’s effort to support the Transit Village Initiative, which facilitates targeted development and redevelopment near transit stations, a strategy known as transit-oriented development (TOD). The impetus for this gathering was, in part, the change in leadership in state government — now headed by Governor Jon Corzine. S ponsored by the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), the symposium was organized by the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. Additional support was provided by the New Jersey State League of Municipalities. T he New Jersey Transit Village Initiative seeks to revitalize and grow selected communities with transit as an anchor. A Transit Village is designated as the half-mile area around a transit facility (this is also typically referred to as a TOD district). There are currently 17 designated Villages: Belmar, Bloomfield, Bound Brook, Collingswood, Cranford, Jersey City, Matawan, Metuchen, Morristown, New Brunswick, Netcong, Pleasantville, Rahway, Riverside, Rutherford, South Amboy, and South Orange. In opening remarks, Dean James W.
    [Show full text]
  • Morristown Plan Endorsement Process
    TOWN OF MORRISTOWN MUNICIPAL SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT Town of Morristown Plan Endorsement Process Prepared by: Town of Morristown Planning Division Topology NJ, LLC April 2020 Page 1 of 63 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 4 Introduction 5 Location and Regional Context 6 Demographics 9 Community Inventory 16 Community Vision & Public Participation 18 Status of Master Plan and Other Relevant Planning Activities 20 Recent and Upcoming Development Activities 22 Statement of Planning Coordination 23 State Programs, Grants and Capital Projects 24 Internal Consistency in Local Planning 25 Sustainability Statement 26 Consistency with State Plan – Goals, Policies and Indicators 34 Consistency with State Plan – Center Criteria and Policies 36 Consistency with State Plan – Planning Area Policy Objectives 38 State Agency Assistance 39 Conclusion 40 Appendix A: List of Maps 51 Appendix B: Contaminated Sites in Morristown 54 Appendix C: Overview of Zoning Board of Adjustment Applications Page 2 of 63 [THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Page 3 of 63 INTRODUCTION New Jersey’s State Development & Redevelopment Plan (State Plan), adopted in 1992 and readopted in 2001, articulates the State’s long-term goals, policies, and objectives. It guides policy making at and coordination between all levels of government for housing, economic development, land use, transportation, natural resource conservation, agriculture and farmland retention, historic preservation, and public facilities and services. The State Plan allows the State Planning Commission to designate several types of Centers. These designations promote dense growth to combat sprawl, increase housing inventories, promote economic development, and enhance the overall quality of life. Morristown currently is designated as a Regional Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Moving on up I Carlstadt Buys Building for Police Station Police Liaison
    Pulse of the Moodowiond*' Wood-Ridge • Carlstadt • East Rutherford • Rutherford • Lyndhurst • North Arlington Ihuisdoy July 17 200B Cancer fighter continues on. despite state's study results By Akxis lbrraxi StMOR RrPORTF* Park with classic melodies and hih on Saturday, JuV'2. For the (u»*xy LYNDHURST — Lyndhursts the concert, pl«m» see B 3 cancer rale is similar to surround- COMMUNITY BRIEFS ing towns and other municipalities in Bergen ( ountv. according to a Showboat casino new study released July 10. However, former township resi- trip set for July 25 dent Lorraine Colabella says she is LYNDHURST — The going to continue to push forward Lvndhursi Department of with more studies. Parks and Ret reation "We are bv no means going to announced tli.it there will be drop it," Colabella said "We are a trip to the Showboat casino continuing." in Atlantic ("itv on Thursday, Concerns over a possible cancer Julv 25. Tickets are S1H per cluster in Lvndhursi due to envi- person, with a cash return ot ronmental effects were recently $20 and $5 food voucher, and raised and brought to the fore- art- on sale at the parks front of the state's attention bv department. Call 201-804- Colabella 2482 for information- "Everyone has someone in their family with it or who died ot it." Colabella said of cancer in a previ- Registration for ous interview Too mam people football/cheering Upgrades roll into Rutherford station have it in one town." NORTH ARLINGTON — Diagnosed with incurable multi- The North Arlington Junior By Susan C. Moeler ple myeloma five years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Adopted Redevelopment Plan — Block 254, Lots 1 Through 10
    REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFQ/RFP) FOR THE 7 TO 27 NORTH WOOD AVENUE AND FROM 11-15 TO 101 WEST ELIZABETH AVENUE BLOCK 254, LOTS 1-10 REDEVELOPMENT AREA LINDEN, NEW JERSEY DUE DATE: April 30, 2020 Issued by: CITY OF LINDEN 301 NORTH WOOD AVENUE LINDEN, NEW JERSEY 07036 Redevelopment Counsel McManimon Scotland & Baumann, LLC 75 Livingston Avenue Second Floor Roseland, New Jersey 07068 TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY..................................................................................................................................... iii SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 RFQ/RFP Documents .......................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Examination of Documents, Familiarity with the Services Required to be Performed ............................................................................................................................................. 2 1.4 Pre-Submission Conference, Site Visit ...................................................................................2 1.5 Evaluation Process ..................................................................................................................3 1.6 Schedule ..................................................................................................................................3 1.7
    [Show full text]
  • Union County, New Jersey City of Plainfield Demographics
    Union County, New Jersey City of Plainfield http://plainfield.com Demographics Population 50,636 Land Area (sq. miles) 6.02 Per capita income $23,594 Percent below poverty 22.1% Median household income $55,657 Median age 34.4 Total housing units 16,366 Median housing value $235,800 Average household size 3.33 Mean travel time to work 30.5 Age 3+ enrolled in school 11,990 Persons per square mile 8,411.3 Unemployment rate 6.0%* Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2012‐2016 (5‐Year Estimates), *USDOL Bureau of Labor Statistics – December 2017 GIS Website to Access High Detail Interactive Map : http://ucgis.ucnj.org/UnionCountyGIS/WebPages/Map/FundyViewer.aspx History, Location & Highlights The City of Plainfield is located in southwestern Union County, and is bordered by Somerset County to the northwest, Middlesex County to the south, Scotch Plains to the east and north, and Fanwood to the east. Plainfield became a township in 1847, a village in 1867 and finally a city in 1869. The City grew significantly following the completion of the railroad between Elizabethtown and Plainfield, and is still served by the Raritan Valley Line, which connects it to other destinations in the State and New York City. In 2014, Plainfield was named #40 on Business Insider’s list of the top 50 most exciting small cities in America. The City of Plainfield is the recipient of the NJ Future 2015 Smart Growth Award for a project to rezone both train station areas, including designation of a new high‐density residential zone and of the Gateway Redevelopment Area, to encourage transit‐oriented development.
    [Show full text]
  • Middlesex County Transportation Plan: Projects by Subregion and Municipality
    Middlesex County Transportation Plan Proposed and Completed Projects: by Subregion and Municipality November 2013 Middlesex County Transportation Plan: Projects by Subregion and Municipality Table of Contents PROJECTS SUMMARY............................................................................................................................ 1 EAST SUBREGION .................................................................................................................................. 2 Carteret Borough....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Metuchen Borough ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Old Bridge Township ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Perth Amboy City ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Sayreville Borough..................................................................................................................................................... 5 South Amboy City ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 Woodbridge Township .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nj Transit Real Estate Report: Fiscal Year 2020 P.L
    NJ TRANSIT REAL ESTATE REPORT: FISCAL YEAR 2020 P.L. 2018, c. 135 October 1, 2020 Executive Summary New Jersey Transit Corporation’s Office of Real Estate Economic Development and Transit-Oriented Development ensures efficient management of NJ TRANSIT’s real estate assets to support safe, reliable mass transit service and maximize non-farebox revenue opportunities. The office assesses and develops recommendations for economic development and transit-oriented development opportunities for parcels of real property in which the corporation holds a property interest in order to increase the corporation’s non-fare revenue sources. Effective November 1, 2018, P.L. 2018, c. 135 amended N.J.S.A. 27:25-20 to require NJ TRANSIT to issue an annual report containing: a list of each parcel of real property owned by the corporation; the most recent appraised value of that real property only if the corporation has obtained an appraisal during the three years immediately preceding the report; the purpose for which the corporation holds the real property; any revenue the corporation receives that arises out of the real property; and any real property sold or otherwise disposed of, including the amount of money received by the corporation for that sale or disposition, during the one year period immediately preceding the report and including an accompanying explanation for any real property disposed of for less than market value and any real property acquired for more than market value. Pursuant to those reporting requirements, NJ TRANSIT is pleased to provide this report. Real Property Owned: The attached represents a list of real property owned by the corporation and its underlying property purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT MASTER PLAN CITY of PLAINFIELD in the County of Union
    DRAFT MASTER PLAN CITY OF PLAINFIELD in the County of Union State of New Jersey Prepared by Remington & Vernick Engineers 232 Kings Highway East Haddonfield, NJ 08033 April 2009 _________________________ _____________________________ Craig F. Remington, P.L.S., P.P. George R. Stevenson, Jr., P.P., AICP License #LI01877 License #LI05487 N.B. The original of this document was signed and sealed in accordance with NJAC 13:41-1.3.b Mayor Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs City Council Rashid Burney Linda Carter Adrian O. Mapp Annie C. McWilliams William Reid Elliot Simmons Cory Storch City Solicitor Marc Dashield, Esq. Clerk Laddie Wyatt City Planner William Nierstedt, P.P., AICP Planning Board Members Ken Robertson, Chairman Horace Baldwin Ron Scott Bey Charles Eke Gordon Fuller Barbara James Cory Storch William Toth Sidney Jackson Planning Board Attorney Michele Donato, Esquire Director of Public Works and Urban Development Jennifer Wenson Maier TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 4 Land Use Element 25 Circulation Element 48 Housing Element 76 Community Facilities/Social Services Plan Element 101 Recreation Plan Element 128 Historic Preservation Element 150 Stormwater Management Plan Element 161 Consistency Statement 174 Introduction The master plan shall generally comprise a report or statement and land use and development proposals, with maps, diagrams and text, presenting, at least the following elements (1) and (2) and where appropriate, the following elements (3) through (14): (1) A statement of objectives, principles, assumptions, policies and standards upon which the constituent proposals for the physical, economic and social development of the municipality are based; (NJSA 40:55D-28 MLUL) 1. Purpose The purpose of this document is to update and create anew the Master Plan of the City of Plainfield.
    [Show full text]
  • Ardmore Transit Center
    Proposal for the Ardmore Transit Center Submitted by: Strategic Realty Investments September 19, 2007 RDMORE Pennsylvania aughan and autter A V BUILDERS September 18, 2007 Bruce D. Reed, President Table of Contents Township of Lower Merion Board of Commissioners Project Approach 75 East Lancaster Avenue Ardmore, Pennsylvania 19003 Our Team RE: Ardmore Transit Center and Business District Revitalization Strategic Realty Investment Dear President Reed: Looney Ricks Kiss Architects, Inc. We would like to applaud all of the commissioners and township staff for all of their hard work that was very evident in the preparation of this request for proposals – Ardmore Transit Traffic Planning and Design, Inc. Center and Business District Revitalization. As evidenced by the recent historical summary chronicling William Penn’s vision for Lower Merion that was recently circulated to your residents, we are extremely fortunate for the many historical influences that have help shape this wonderful community and township. We believe, as responsible stewards that it is critical to respect these past influences and build upon the positive elements that have attracted some many to this area. It is our belief that the revitalization of Ardmore will and should occur in a thoughtful, planned and deliberate manner. This will undoubtedly result from further direction and input from the commissioners, township staff along with the many stakeholders that will be impacted. We have provided some initial thoughts and comments that we hope will form the basis for further dialogue. Initially our plan and vision has focused on the area immediately surrounding the commuter rail station and the pedestrian and vehicular access to and from this area.
    [Show full text]
  • Moving Nj Forward
    MOVING NJ FORWARD NJ TRANSIT 2010 ANNUAL REPORT 1 coNTents 3 Message from the Chairman 16 what’S NexT 4 Message from the Executive Director 18 NJ TRANSIT oN-TIme 5 The yeAR IN RevIew peRFoRmANce by mode 19 Rail Methodology 8 Fy2010 hIGhLIGhTS 20 Light Rail Methodology 10 Equipment Update 21 Bus Methodology 11 Facility Improvements 12 Transit Oriented Development 22 Board of Directors’ Biographies 13 Green Initiatives 24 Advisory Committees 14 State of Good Repair Fy2010 FINANcial report 15 Technology (Attached) 2 message FRom the chAIRmAN A Message from the Chairman A battered global and regional economy presented NJ TRANSIT with many challenges in FY2010, requiring tough decisions. Steady leadership bridged a change in administrations and helped bring clarity and purpose to the choices that we made to cut spending, increase revenue and target limited resources. A careful selection of projects that we advanced during the year created a portfolio of investments that will pay dividends to our customers in the days and years ahead, when economic and ridership growth return. As the fiscal year unfolded, we responded proactively to ridership declines triggered by a sluggish job market and reduced state funding. Austerity measures, including an emergency spending freeze, cuts in executive salaries and other steps, signaled that the corporation understood the need to make sacrifices before it asked customers late in the fiscal year to pay a higher percentage of the actual cost for the transit services they depend on. It is a testament to the professionalism of NJ TRANSIT leadership and its employees that, despite this difficult fiscal environment, they focused on the future and launched or delivered projects that will serve as the foundation for an improved, interconnected and multimodal public transportation network.
    [Show full text]