How and where we invest in our transportation infrastructure has a major impact on growth and development patterns in the state.
Expanding roads and highways often leads to low-density auto-oriented development in suburban and exurban areas, while investing in mass transit in already developed communities can lead to urban revitalization and redevelopment — as has happened, for example, along the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail line. In general, New Jersey Future supports the maintenance of existing infrastructure over expanding capacity (a policy known as fix-it-first), as well as an equitable distribution of funding between roads and alternative forms of transportation such as mass transit and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. New Jersey Future is also a strong supporter of “Complete Streets,” a policy that calls for accommodating all users, not just drivers, when designing a new road or retrofitting an old one.
Cities around the country are discovering that investments in transit bring economic benefits. New Jersey could take a lesson.
Can fees on shoes, tolls on sidewalks and subsidies for SUVs help solve New Jersey’s transportation funding problem?
New Jersey, and the entire region, can learn from New York’s success how best to invest in economic growth.
This is the first in a series of articles from our friends at NJ Spotlight laying out the critical policy challenges that the next governor and Legislature will face, as well as their positions on these issues.
Unless we focus on difficult, long-term issues, we risk making New Jersey less competitive and hindering our future growth and prosperity.
New Jersey has 243 transit facilities, ranging from small single-track stations to major multi-line hubs. The unique characteristics of each station, of its immediate neighborhood, and of its surrounding municipality mean that a wide variety of development strategies should be brought to bear in order to maximize each location’s potential. This report shows how data assembled by New Jersey Future can be used to make decisions on how to target various kinds of transit-oriented development efforts. September 2012.
An assessment of how comprehensively New Jersey’s Department of Transportation has implemented its Complete Streets Policy. September 2011.
June 29, 2012 — In response to the announcement of a conference committee deal to authorize the federal transportation program through September 2014, transportation advocates expressed disappointment at the bill’s lack of reforms and at provisions that would make it harder for communities in New Jersey to provide input on major projects and improve street safety
2014 Smart Growth Awards: Study identifies land use changes and transportation improvements to spur growth for Somerset County.
Sept. 25, 2010 — Given the transportation needs of the region, and the physical constraints within which this tunnel must be built, the choice is not between the ARC project and some perfectly crafted alternative, it is between this project and no project — and that is really no choice at all.
Reports, Presentations and Testimony
- Social Innovation and Smart Growth 9-13 (Intern Report)
- 10/01/2012 Final NJ_MAP-21_letter
- 06-15-2012: S2020 Fuels Spiral of Debt in New Jersey’s Transportation Trust Fund
- 04/02/2012: NJFuture Comments to State Planning Commission on Draft State Strategic Plan
- 03/30/2011: Testimony: Preserve Transit Villages in Transportation Capital Plan
- Sheehan-Mans JOINT STATEMENT ON ARC TUNNEL
- Pocino statement on ARC 10 08 10
- ARC Information Sheet 9-10
- 04-03-2009 Letter to DEP re Global Warming Solutions Fund Rules
- 04-02-2009 Testimony re Proposed Cuts in NJ Transit Budget
- Presentation: Re-Funding Transportation Trust Fund 05-11
- 09-20-2010 Testimony on ARC Tunnel
- 10-04-2010 Testimony on Transportation Trust Fund ARC Tunnel
- Monmouth University Poll
- ARC Support Letter to Christie 09-14-10
- NJ Transit RFQ for Parking Concession 10-10