Transportation Capital Program Fiscal Year 2021
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Highway and Bridge Project Summary by Subregion NJTPA
NJTPA Transportation Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2020 - 2023 Highway and Bridge Project Summary by Subregion ($ Millions) FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 Page Project DBNUM PHASE COST PHASE COST PHASE COST PHASE COST Bergen County Projects ADDITION TO TIP AS OF 12/7/2020 East Anderson Street Bridge (02C0023A) over the N1801 PE 1.90 DES 3.00 1 Hackensack River ADDITION TO TIP AS OF 2/11/2020 Fifth Avenue Bridge (AKA Fair Lawn Avenue Bridge) over NS9606 CON 17.50 2 Passaic River ADDITION TO TIP AS OF 12/7/2020 Kingsland Avenue, Bridge over Passaic River N1601 PE 1.50 DES 2.50 3 Market Street/Essex Street/Rochelle Avenue 98546 DES 1.00 ROW 0.20 4 REVISION 1 AS OF 2/4/2021 Route 4, Bridge over Palisade Avenue, Windsor Road and 065C ROW 1.50 UTI 3.00 CON 23.10 5 CSX Railroad REPLACED BY REVISION 1 Route 4, Bridge over Palisade Avenue, Windsor Road and 065C ROW 1.50 UTI 3.00 CON 23.10 6 CSX Railroad Route 4, Grand Avenue Bridge 08410 DES 4.00 ROW 1.50 7 Route 4, Hackensack River Bridge 02346 DES 4.50 ROW 1.40 8 REVISION 1 AS OF 2/14/2020 Route 4, Jones Road Bridge 94064 ROW 0.60 CON 22.00 9 REPLACED BY REVISION 1 Route 4, Jones Road Bridge 94064 ROW 0.60 CON 22.00 10 UTI 6.00 Route 4, River Drive to Tunbridge Road 12431A CON 7.35 11 Route 4, Teaneck Road Bridge 93134 CON 13.50 12 Route 17, Bridges over NYS&W RR & RR Spur & Central 14319 DES 3.05 13 Avenue (CR 44) Route 17, Pierrepont Ave to Terrace Ave/Polify Rd (CR 55) 15383 CON 6.10 14 REVISION 1 AS OF 2/14/2020 Route 46, Bergen Boulevard to Main Street 12428 CON 4.10 15 REPLACED BY -
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 -
Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present
Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA district 1964-2021 By Jonathan Belcher with thanks to Richard Barber and Thomas J. Humphrey Compilation of this data would not have been possible without the information and input provided by Mr. Barber and Mr. Humphrey. Sources of data used in compiling this information include public timetables, maps, newspaper articles, MBTA press releases, Department of Public Utilities records, and MBTA records. Thanks also to Tadd Anderson, Charles Bahne, Alan Castaline, George Chiasson, Bradley Clarke, Robert Hussey, Scott Moore, Edward Ramsdell, George Sanborn, David Sindel, James Teed, and George Zeiba for additional comments and information. Thomas J. Humphrey’s original 1974 research on the origin and development of the MBTA bus network is now available here and has been updated through August 2020: http://www.transithistory.org/roster/MBTABUSDEV.pdf August 29, 2021 Version Discussion of changes is broken down into seven sections: 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA 2) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Eastern Mass. St. Ry. Co. Norwood Area Quincy Area Lynn Area Melrose Area Lowell Area Lawrence Area Brockton Area 3) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Middlesex and Boston St. Ry. Co 4) MBTA bus routes inherited from Service Bus Lines and Brush Hill Transportation 5) MBTA bus routes initiated by the MBTA 1964-present ROLLSIGN 3 5b) Silver Line bus rapid transit service 6) Private carrier transit and commuter bus routes within or to the MBTA district 7) The Suburban Transportation (mini-bus) Program 8) Rail routes 4 ROLLSIGN Changes in MBTA Bus Routes 1964-present Section 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) succeeded the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on August 3, 1964. -
Park & Ride Commuter Lots
Park &RideCommuterLots Serving I–270 and US 29 Corridors in Montgomery County A Handy Guide to Free Parking and An Easier Commute to Work Effective July 2002 Tired of fighting the traffic ? Want to make your commute to work easier and less stressful? Spending too much money parking your car downtown? Need a place to meet your carpool or vanpool? Free Park & Ride Commuter Lots may be the answer to your quest. Commuters may park their vehicles in most of Montgomery County’s Park & Ride Lots at no cost. There are a few lots, however, that may require a parking permit and fee. You can meet your carpools or vanpools, or take public transit from these lots. Park & Ride...Make it easier for yourself. Use this brochure as a guide to Park & Ride Commuter Lots along the I-270 and U.S. 29 Corridors, including selected Lots in neighbor- ing jurisdictions. For more information on bus routes serving these lots, contact the following service providers. Montgomery County Commuter Services Free personalized assistance to help commuters join a carpool or vanpool. Promotes alternative trans- portation benefits for employees. The Commuter Express Store, located at 8401 Colesville Road, Silver Spring, sells fare media, such as Metrobus/rail passes, tickets, and tokens, and Ride On bus passes and tickets. Pick up timetables and transportation information (301) 770-POOL (7665) www.rideonbus.com (click on Commuter Services) Ride On Bus (routes, schedules, fares) (240) 777-7433 (touchtone) (240) 777-5871 (rotary) (240) 777-5869 (TTY/TDD) www.rideonbus.com (passes and tokens sold online) Prince George’s County THE BUS (301) 324-BUSS (routes & schedules) 1-800-735-2258 (TDD) Department of Public Works and Transportation (301) 925-5656–Office of Transportation www.goprincegeorgescounty.com CONNECT-A-RIDE A fixed route community–based bus service in the mid–Baltimore/Washington suburban area. -
Section5march05.Pdf
The existing environment and potential impacts of the Master Plan are complex. For each environmental topic, information on existing conditions and potential environmental consequences have been merged into one subsection to eliminate repetition of material, and for the convenience of the reader. The proposed action is a Master Plan or long range guidance document, and no physical development will actually occur under the proposed action. No direct impacts or consequences will occur as a result of the proposed action. Environmental consequences are conditional, and dependent on the extent to which proposed projects are actually implemented or built. This EIS presents an overview of the cumulative environmental consequences that would occur if all the proposed facilities were to be built. Actual cumulative impacts may range anywhere between those for the No Action Alternative and the Master Plan Alternative. 5.1 SOCIOECONOMIC/LAND USE 5.1.1 Overview The National Institutes of Health main campus is located in Montgomery County, Maryland, one of the largest jurisdictions in the Washington, D.C. region. As a result of expansion of the urbanized area, cross-commuting patterns, and other economic interrelationships, the federal Government recently designated a broader Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area for this region. This new CMSA encompasses both the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas, incorporating an area of nearly 9,600 square miles circumscribed by a 75 mile radius around downtown Washington, D.C. The limits of the CMSA extend from the Pennsylvania border to the edge of metropolitan Richmond, Virginia. On an east-west axis, the CMSA stretches from Queen Anne's County, Maryland, on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay to Berkeley and Jefferson Counties, in the West Virginia panhandle (Population of Metropolitan Areas and Component Geography: 1980 and 1990 (6/30/93 definition), 1990 CPH-L-145, U.S. -
Transportation Capital Program Fiscal Year 2003
Transportation Capital Program Fiscal Year 2003 NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NJ TRANSIT July 1, 2002 Governor James E. McGreevey Commissioner James P. Fox Table of Contents Section I - Introduction Section II - Program by Activity Section III - NJDOT Project/Program Descriptions Section IV - NJ TRANSIT Project/Program Descriptions Section V – Glossary Section I INTRODUCTION NJDOT/NJ TRANSIT Capital Investment Strategy for FY03-FY07 Introduction The Transportation Capital Program for Fiscal Year 2003 describes all the capital investments planned by the New Jersey Department of Transportation and NJ TRANSIT for the fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2002. A multi-year program, as required under federal law, is also under development. Both of these programs are the products of extensive, ongoing participation by the state’s three metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and a wide variety of stakeholders. Both programs are driven by New Jersey’s transportation goals and objectives, as laid out in this “capital investment strategy” report. “Capital investment strategy” is the term used in New Jersey for a method of linking transportation investments with goals, objectives, and performance measures. New Jersey is a national leader in the development of this approach, which ensures that scarce financial resources are used as efficiently as possible to address our most important needs. This report provides an overview of NJDOT’s and NJ TRANSIT’s capital programs and concludes with a summary of the revenues which are planned to be used to finance these programs. NJDOT Smart Growth NJDOT is committed to making transportation investments that implement Governor McGreevey’s “Smart Growth” initiative. -
Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 129/Friday, July 5, 2002/Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2002 / Notices 44929 the Township of Cranford; (3) the The rail lines qualify for a modified SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is former Rahway Valley Railroad certificate of public convenience and hereby given that the Certificate of Company (Rahway Valley) main line necessity. See Common Carrier Status of Authority issued by the Treasury to the from milepost 0 at the junction with the States, State Agencies and above named Company, under the NJ Transit (Raritan Valley Line) in Instrumentalities and Political United States Code, Title 31, Sections Cranford to milepost 3.9 immediately Subdivisions, Finance Docket No. 9304–9308, to qualify as an acceptable southeast of the Rahway River Bridge in 28990F (ICC served July 16, 1981). surety on Federal bonds is terminated Union, inclusive of the branch line from M&E indicates that, even though effective today. the junction at milepost 3.1 and rehabilitation subsidies are being The Company was last listed as an extending northeast approximately 1.1 provided, the lines will operate without acceptable surety on Federal bonds at 66 miles, and the branch line from the any operating subsidies. M&E also FR 35055, July 2, 2001. junction at milepost 1.1 and extending indicates that there are no preconditions With respect to any bonds, including southeast approximately .50 miles; and for shippers to meet in order to receive continuous bonds, currently in force (4) the former Rahway Valley main line rail service, and that it has obtained with above listed Company, bond- from milepost 3.9 immediately liability insurance coverage. -
Transportation Policy and Governance in the Northeast Corridor: an Overview of Major Public Agencies
Transportation Policy and Governance in the Northeast Corridor: An Overview of Major Public Agencies August 2009 by David Beauchamp Robert Warren cartographic and research assistance by Geoff Edwards Xuan “Olivia” Jiang DEL Institute for Public Administration College of Education & Public Policy University of Delaware www.ipa.udel.edu funded by the University Transportation Center Transportation Policy and Governance in the Northeast Corridor: An Overview of Major Public Agencies August 2009 by David Beauchamp Robert Warren cartographic and research assistance by Geoff Edwards Olivia Jiang Institute for Public Administration College of Education & Public Policy University of Delaware TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND GOVERNANCE IN THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR: AN OVERVIEW OF MAJOR PUBLIC AGENCIES August 2009 Preface As the Director of the Institute for Public Administration (IPA) at the University of Delaware, I am pleased to provide this report on Transportation Policy and Governance in the Northeast Corridor: An Overview of Major Public Agencies. This project is part of a larger effort by IPA to be a leader in conducting research and convening forums and workshops relating to major governance and economic development issues in the Northeast Corridor (NEC). In this report, an effort has been made to provide definitions for the NEC, to illustrate its dimensions on a series of maps, and provide a directory of the major agencies that have some role to play in planning, building, and maintaining transportation resources. Because there are so many public jurisdictions and private-sector players involved in transportation planning in the NEC, the picture is often blurred and confusing. We hope this description of stakeholder agencies and their roles and missions will provide some clarity as policymakers move forward to provide greater multimodal connectivity and renewal of aging infrastructure. -
Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 107 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 107 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 147 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2001 No. 163 House of Representatives b 0602 propriated, for the Department of Transpor- other provision of law, excluding fees author- tation and related agencies for the fiscal year ized in Public Law 107–71, there may be credited f ending September 30, 2002, and for other pur- to this appropriation up to $2,500,000 in funds AFTER RECESS poses, namely: received in user fees: Provided further, That the The recess having expired, the House TITLE I Secretary of Transportation is authorized to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION transfer funds appropriated for any office of the was called to order by the Speaker pro Office of the Secretary to any other office of the OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY tempore (Mr. SHIMKUS) at 6 o’clock and Office of the Secretary: Provided further, That 2 minutes a.m. SALARIES AND EXPENSES no appropriation for any office shall be in- f For necessary expenses of the Office of the creased or decreased by more than 7 percent by Secretary, $67,778,000, of which not to exceed all such transfers: Provided further, That any CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2299, $1,929,000 shall be available for the immediate such transfer shall be submitted for approval to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR- Office of the Secretary; not to exceed $619,000 the House and Senate Committees on Appropria- TATION AND RELATED AGEN- shall be available for the immediate Office of the tions. -
ANGEL G. ESTRADA, CHAIRMAN BOARD MEETING AGENDA July 8
ANGEL G. ESTRADA, CHAIRMAN BOARD MEETING AGENDA July 8, 2019 10:00 AM Galloping Hill Golf Course 3 Golf Drive Kenilworth, NJ 07033 (Directions on Page 3) A. Open Public Meetings Act Compliance B. Salute to the Flag C. Roll Call D. Approval of Minutes E. Chairman’s Remarks F. Executive Director’s Report G. Committee Reports/Action Items* Project Prioritization – Freeholder Kathy DeFillippo, Chair 1. Endorsement of the Draft FY 2020 Transportation Capital Program (Attachments G.1.a., G.1.b, G.1.c., G.1.d.) 2. Minor Amendment to the FY 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program as Requested by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey to Utilize Disaster Recovery and Resilience Program Funding (Attachments G.2.a., G.2.b.) 3. Minor Amendment to the FY 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program to Add Federal Funds to the Route 3, Route 46, Valley Road and Notch/Rifle Camp Road Interchange, Contract B Project in Passaic County as Requested by the New Jersey Department of Transportation (Attachment G.3.a., G.3.b.) Planning and Economic Development – Freeholder John Bartlett, Chair * Following the Committee Reports, there will be an opportunity for public comment prior to any Action Item vote. 2 Freight Initiatives – Freeholder Charles Kenny, Chair Federal Policy Update – Freeholder Matthew Holt H. Planning for 2050 Presentation: The Challenges and Opportunities of Growing Racial Diversity in the Suburbs of Northern New Jersey - Myron Orfield, Director, Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity, University of Minnesota Law School I. Public Participation J. Time and Place of Next Meeting: The next meeting of the NJTPA will be held on September 9, 2019 at the NJTPA, One Newark Center, 17th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102. -
Discussion Points
Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018 Discussion Points Department Of Transportation/ New Jersey Turnpike Authority 1a. The FY 2016 Transportation Trust Fund Authority (TTFA) Financial Plan projected an outlay of $1.127 billion for transportation project costs, and a closing cash balance at the end of FY 2016 of $57.7 million. The Governor issued Executive Order No. 210 on June, 30 2016 which directed the immediate and orderly shutdown all non-emergency TTF projects, except for those federally funded, on the premise that the TTFA would exhaust all of its available funds in August 2016. • Question: What was the actual cash balance of the TTFA on the date Executive Order No. 210 was issued? What amount of spending on transportation costs was likely to have occurred during July 2016 had Executive Order No. 210 not been issued? What amount did the TTFA expend for transportation project costs in FY 2016? If this amount fell short of the original projection, please explain the reasons for that shortfall. Answer: As of June 30, 2016, the cash balance in the TTFA totaled $201 million. Prior to the shutdown, the TTFA’s monthly average cash expenses were approximately $90 million. In FY2016, the Authority’s gross transportation costs totaled $1,086.5 million, a figure which accounts for NJ Transit’s repayment of a TTF cash loan totaling $241.5 million. 1b. The TTFA FY 2016 Financial Plan also noted a FY 2015 closing net balance or “tail” of $1.94 billion, which represents authorized project costs that have not yet been realized as a cash expense. -
White Flint Sector Plan
White Flint Sector Plan Transportation Appendix January 2009 Table of Contents 1. Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Transportation Plan Recommendations ....................................................................... 3 A. Travel Demand Management ................................................................................ 4 B. Transit System ......................................................................................................... 9 C. Street Network....................................................................................................... 15 D. Bicycle and Pedestrian System............................................................................. 23 E. Transportation System Policies............................................................................ 26 F. Staging .................................................................................................................... 28 G. Implementation ..................................................................................................... 29 H. Summary of Changes to the 1994 Plan ............................................................... 30 3. Transportation/Land Use Balance ............................................................................. 31 A. Measures of Effectiveness ..................................................................................... 32 B. Travel Demand Forecasting Process and Assumptions