Twenty-Year Strategic Plan for Transportation

in the Coastal Corridor Transportation Investment Area

November 7, 2001

Submitted to the Connecticut Transportation Strategy Board

Coastal Corridor TIA Board Members

Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV)

RPO Representative:�� Peter Dorpalen, Executive Director, COGCNV

Alternate:�� Laurel Stegina, Senior Planner, COGCNV

Public Representative:�� Calvin Vinal, Vice President of Community Development, Webster Bank

Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency (GBRPA)

RPO Representative:�� Honorable Karen Burnaska (co-chair), Selectman, Town of Monroe

Alternate:�� James Wang, Executive Director, GBRPA

Public Representative:�� Jeffrey J. O�Keefe, General Manager, Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority

Alternate:�� James Wang, Executive Director, GBRPA

Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials (HVCEO)

RPO Representative:�� Jonathon Chew, Executive Director, HVCEO

Alternate:�� George Walker, Manager, Office Park

Public Representative:�� Cheryl Reedy, Newspaper Executive

Alternate:�� George Walker, Manager, Office Park

South Central Regional Council of Governments (SCRCOG)

RPO Representative:�� Judy Gott, Executive Director, SCRCOG

Alternate:�� Honorable William Dickinson, Mayor, Town of Wallingford

Public Representative:�� Dan Lorimier, Connecticut Fund for the Environment

South Western Regional Planning Agency (SWRPA)

RPO Representative:�� Honorable Robert F. Harrel, First Selectman, Town of Darien

Alternate:�� Honorable Diane Farrell, First Selectman, Town of Westport

Public Representative:�� Franklin Bloomer (co-chair), Greenwich Safe Cycling

Alternate:�� Vincent DeMarco, Automotive Business

Valley Regional Planning Agency (VRPA)

RPO Representative:�� Honorable Mark A. Lauretti, Mayor, City of Shelton

Alternate:�� Honorable Marc J. Garofalo, Mayor, City of Derby

Public Representative:�� Edward Houghton, Executive, Pitney Bowes

Alternate:�� William Purcell, President, Greater Valley Chamber of Commerce

At-Large Members

�� Jim Cameron, Vice Chairman, Metro North Comm. Council

�� Bruce Heyl, Principal, Fletcher-Thompson

�� Denis K. Pope, Association of Commuter Rail Employees

�� Martin Tristine, President, Logistec Conn. Inc.

At-Large Alternates

�� Richard Carpenter, Retired Executive Director of SWRPA

�� Joe McGee, Vice President, SACIA

Ex-Officio Members

Congressmen James Maloney representaed by Lewis Wallace

Congressman Christopher Shays represented by Peter Barhydt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Overview.................................................................................................................... 1

Vision Statement.......................................................................................................... 1

�� Movement of People................................................................................................... 2

�� Commitment to Transit..................................................................................... 2

�� Roads............................................................................................................. 2

�� Commuter and Intercity Rail............................................................................. 2

�� Bus Transit...................................................................................................... 2

�� Waterborne..................................................................................................... 3

�� Airborne.......................................................................................................... 3

�� Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities....................................................................... 3

�� Movement of Goods.................................................................................................... 3

�� Rail................................................................................................................. 3

�� Trucks............................................................................................................. 3

�� Waterborne..................................................................................................... 3

�� Land Use Issues.......................................................................................................... 3

�� Funding Issues............................................................................................................. 4

Twenty-Year Strategic Plan for Transportation in the Coastal Corridor TIA

1. Purpose of the Plan.............................................................................................................. 5

2. Development of the Plan ..................................................................................................... 5

3. Maps of the Coastal Corridor TIA....................................................................................... 6

4. Vision Statement.................................................................................................................. 6

5. General Recommendations................................................................................................... 6

�� Projects Outside the Scope of this Project............................................ 6

�� Travel Forecasting by Mode, Origin, and Destination............................ 7

�� Collaboration with Neighboring States.................................................. 7

�� Enhance North-South Connectivity...................................................... 7

�� Improve Access to Airports................................................................. 7

6. Movement of People........................................................................................................... 7

�� Recommendation............................................................................................. 8

�� Increase Commitment to Transit........................................................... 8

�� A. Roads..................................................................................................................... 9

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 9

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 9

�� Roadway Improvements...................................................................... 9

�� Transportation Systems Management Strategies................................... 10

�� B. Transportation Demand Management Strategies....................................................... 11

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 11

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 11

�� C. Commuter and Intercity Rail.................................................................................... 12

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 12

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 13

�� Order New Rail Cars Immediately....................................................... 13

�� Infrastructure....................................................................................... 13

�� Stations............................................................................................... 13

�� Expanded Service................................................................................ 14

�� Metro North Operating Agreement...................................................... 14

�� D. Bus Transit� 14

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 14

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 15

�� Consolidation of Bus Services.............................................................. 15

�� Expanded Service................................................................................ 15

�� Job Access.......................................................................................... 16

�� Marketing............................................................................................ 16

�� Miscellaneous...................................................................................... 16

�� E. Waterborne�� ........................................................................................................... 16

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 16

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 17

�� F. Airborne................................................................................................................. 17

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 17

�� Recommendation............................................................................................. 17

�� G. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities.............................................................................. 17

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 17

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 18

6. Movement of Goods............................................................................................................ 18

�� Recommendation............................................................................................. 19

�� A. Rail......................................................................................................................... 19

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 19

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 19

�� B. Trucks.................................................................................................................... 20

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 20

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 20

�� Strategies/Policies................................................................................ 20

�� Projects/Studies................................................................................... 21

�� C. Waterborne�� ........................................................................................................... 21

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 21

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 22

7. Land Use Issues.................................................................................................................. 22

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 23

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 23

8. Funding Issues..................................................................................................................... 24

�� Issues/Problems............................................................................................... 25

�� Recommendations........................................................................................... 25

Endnotes................................................................................................................................. 27

Appendices............................................................................................................................. 29

�� Map 1: Coastal Corridor Transportation Investment Area............................................. 31

�� Map 2: Municipalities and Planning Regions of the Coastal Corridor TIA...................... 33

�� Map 3: Population Densities in the Coastal Corridor TIA.............................................. 35

�� Map 4: Coastal Corridor Transportation Systems......................................................... 37

�� Regional Planning Organization Comments/Endorsements............................................. 39

TWENTY-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION

in the

COASTAL CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT AREA

Executive Summary

This executive summary of the initial twenty-year strategic plan for transportation in the Coastal Corridor TIA (the Plan) was prepared by its Board pursuant to House Bill No. 7506/Public Act 01-5, An Act Implementing the Recommendations of the Transportation Strategy Board (the Act). The Plan also creates a linkage between the TIA�s strategy and projects listed in the Act as eligible for a share of the $50 million in funds appropriated in the FY 2001-2003 budget for projects endorsed by the Transportation Strategy Board.

Overview

Congestion is endemic throughout the Coastal Corridor TIA. It is acute on the primary highways, Interstate Routes I-95 and 84, and U.S. Route 1 and CT Route 15, and particularly acute on the westerly portion of Interstate Route 95. Employers increasingly see long commutes on congested roads as threats to productivity. Congestion also impedes the flow of goods into, out of, and through Connecticut and contributes to the status of much of the Coastal Corridor TIA as a �severe non-attainment area� in terms of air quality.

The opportunity to develop the following alternative modes of transportation exists in the Coastal Corridor TIA:

� Rail lines extend throughout the Coastal Corridor TIA. They are not being utilized to the extent of their capacity, either for people or freight, although they are in urgent need of significant capital investment.

� Based on return from the farebox, Connecticut�s public bus system is one of the most productive in the country, suggesting that there is potential for increased ridership.

� The Coastal Corridor TIA has a potential air passenger market that would appear to support a regional or �secondary� airport.

� The proximity of Long Island Sound offers the possibility of the development of both high speed ferries and increased barge transportation of goods.

� Particularly along the coast, the closeness of the origins and destinations of many trips suggests that there is considerable potential for travel by bicycle and on foot.

Vision Statement

The Plan has established the following vision statement to describe its goal, i.e., the transportation system that should be in place in the TIA at the end of twenty years:

The Coastal Corridor TIA will have a transportation system that offers people and goods a choice of safe, convenient and integrated modes of transportation including (a) roads, (b) waterborne, (c) airborne, (d) rail and other modes of public transit and (e) facilities that make walking and bicycling viable transportation options so as:

� to stimulate sustainable economic growth by ensuring mobility of people and goods within the TIA and connectivity of the TIA�s economy to the state, regional, national and global economies; and

� to enhance quality of life by ensuring mobility of all residents of the TIA, including those unable to drive, while protecting the TIA�s environmental, cultural and community resources.

Movement of People

Where people can reach their destinations only by road, they are trapped in the congested conditions found there and can only contribute to that congestion when traveling. But where choices exist, some will choose another mode of travel and in so doing will make no contribution to road congestion. Development of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles must be the priority. Nonetheless, the automobile will remain the dominant mode by which people travel in the Coastal Corridor TIA, even as alternative modes are developed.

Commitment to Transit. The Plan recommends that a determination be made of how best to enhance focus and accountability for, and commitment to, public transportation in Connecticut, specifically by considering establishment of a separate authority responsible for transit throughout the state and a separate funding source for public transportation.

Roads. The Plan makes both general and specific recommendations regarding roadway improvements. It also recommends a study of specific Transportation Systems Management strategies and their implementation (on a permanent or pilot basis) where appropriate, feasible and not already in place, funding of Conn/DOT�s statewide intelligent transportation systems initiative and expanded use of Transportation Demand Management strategies to encourage the use of transit, carpooling, vanpooling, telecommuting, compressed work schedules, staggered work times, bicycling and walking. It also recommends evaluation of the institution of a Value Pricing Pilot Program on one or more limited access highways in the TIA.

Commuter and Intercity Rail. Ridership on the TIA�s railroads has almost doubled in the last 30 years, but capital investment in rail facilities has not kept pace. The frequency and reliability of both commuter and intercity rail service and the destinations served should be improved so as to make train service more convenient and thus more comparable to use of the automobile. The Plan makes recommendations regarding the need to order new rail cars immediately, specific infrastructure improvements, railroad station strategies, expanded service and Conn/DOT�s agreement with Metro North.

Bus Transit. The Plan notes that a funding �containment� philosophy has limited development of Connecticut�s bus system. It recommends a study of consolidation of agencies to enhance efficiencies and makes recommendations for expanded service including job access services, marketing and cleaner fuels.

Waterborne. Noting the proximity of Long Island Sound, the Plan recommends limited investment in infrastructure to permit private operators to provide High Speed Ferry service.

Airborne. The Plan recommends a study of statewide airport resources and needs.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. To make bicycling and walking viable transportation options, the Plan recommends routine incorporation of bike/ped facilities in all road projects, as well as other, more specific recommendations.

Movement of Goods

Connecticut is heavily dependent on trucks for the movement of goods into, out of and through the State. Providing more choices to shippers and receivers would promote the business climate and mitigate road congestion.

Rail. The Plan recommends encouragement of high speed off-peak truck-competitive rail freight usage of the New Haven Line, the Springfield Line and the New Haven to Boston Northeast Corridor. This can begin immediately through Penn Station for certain commodities, but the Plan recommends that Connecticut support a new rail crossing of the Hudson River. It makes other specific infrastructure recommendations.

Trucks. The Plan acknowledges the efficiency of truck transport, but also its disproportionate contribution to safety and environmental concerns as compared to rail and waterborne alternatives. It makes recommendations regarding rest areas, non-peak movement of goods and specific infrastructure improvements.

Waterborne. The Plan notes the overcrowded facilities at New York/New Jersey port and the projected increase of container shipments into New England. Implementation of feasibility studies of development of Bridgeport�s and New Haven�s port facilities to accommodate barges carrying containers could remove many trucks from Route I-95. The Plan recommends specific infrastructure and process changes to help achieve this.

Land Use Issues

Transportation and land use decisions are usually made separately, even though each profoundly affects the other, and both have strong impacts on the local and regional quality of life. As a result of this disjoined decision-making, the region is consuming much of its land without improving its mobility. Moreover, affordable housing for the work force of many employers is not available in proximity to place of employment. Connecticut must think beyond specific disciplines to create a �multi-modal� approach and managed land use planning for municipal and regional development.

The Plan recommends re-establishment of a Statewide Planning Division within the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management for coordinating and monitoring various short- and long-range plans. It also makes recommendations to encourage, among other things, increased land use clustering, mixed-use development, transit accessibility and pedestrian-oriented development, protection of �Preservation Areas�, redevelopment of �brownfields� and development of new housing stock in areas with demonstrated job demand or availability to transit.

Funding Issues

Connecticut can no longer rely largely on federal funding for the vast majority of its transportation capital and operating needs. Implementing a new transportation strategy will require substantial financial investment in addition to current sources of support and greater flexibility in the use of current funding sources.

The Plan makes recommendations both with respect to new funding sources and allocation of available funding.

TWENTY-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION

in the

COASTAL CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT AREA

1.�� PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

Section 3(d) of House Bill No. 7506/Public Act 01-5, An Act Implementing the Recommendations of the Transportation Strategy Board (the Act) mandates that the participants in each Transportation Investment Area (TIA) prepare an initial TIA Corridor Plan for submission to the Connecticut Transportation Strategy Board by November 15, 2001. Section 1(5) of the Act defines a TIA Corridor Plan as a �twenty-year strategic plan for transportation in the TIA.�

This initial plan was developed to provide an overview of the Coastal Corridor TIA and its primary regional and inter-regional transportation concerns, and to describe a twenty-year strategy for enhancing the TIA�s transportation system. This initial plan also creates a linkage between the TIA�s strategy and transportation projects listed in the Act as eligible for a share of the $50 million in funds appropriated in the fiscal year 2001�2003 budget for projects endorsed by the Transportation Strategy Board.

2.�� DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN

This initial plan has been developed with reference to the transportation needs, strategies and objectives stated in the following regional plans:

� 2001�2021 HVCEO Regional Transportation Plan, prepared by the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials, April 2001.

� Long-Range Regional Transportation Plan 2000, prepared by staff and endorsed by board members of the Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley, January 10, 2001.

� Mobility: A Transportation Plan for the Year 2020, prepared by the South Central Regional Council of Governments, January 2001.

� Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Bridgeport Planning Region, prepared by the Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency with the endorsement of the Greater Bridgeport and the Valley Regional Planning Agency, February 2001.

� South Western Region Long Range Transportation Plan, 2001�2025, prepared by the South Western Regional Planning Agency, June 22, 2001.

� Regional Transportation Plan for the Valley Planning Region, prepared and endorsed by the Valley Regional Planning Agency, February 2001, endorsed by the Greater Bridgeport and Valley Regional Planning Agency.

3. MAPS OF THE COASTAL CORRIDOR TIA

Thematic maps of the Coastal Corridor TIA are attached as Appendices (Maps 1�4) beginning on page 29.

4. VISION STATEMENT

A strategic plan is essentially a method or technique for achieving some end. This initial plan has established a vision statement describing the end it seeks to achieve, i.e., the transportation system that should be in place in the TIA at the end of twenty years. Section 4(c) of the Act describes in broad terms what the strategy should achieve, and the balance of Section 4 provides further guidance. The vision statement is drawn from Section 4 and is not intended to replace it but rather to provide the focus necessary to develop a strategy. The vision statement constitutes a template against which specific proposals are measured.

The following is the vision statement:

� to stimulate sustainable economic growth by ensuring mobility of people and goods within the TIA and connectivity of the TIA�s economy to the state, regional, national and global economies; and

� to enhance quality of life by ensuring mobility of all residents of the TIA, including those unable to drive, while protecting the TIA�s environmental, cultural and community resources.

5. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The following are general recommendations applicable to the entire strategic plan:

Projects Outside the Scope of This Plan

� Projects currently in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) that are already in design, right-of-way acquisition or construction should go forward and should not be de-funded in order to fund priorities identified in this plan.

Travel Forecasting By Mode, Origin and Destination

� While the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) has a statewide computer forecasting model for its own needs, most groups, such as the TIA, and its constituent regional planning organizations, have no such resources. Planning questions involving the examination of traffic flows to view the degree of common origins and destinations are unanswerable. Upgrading the forecasting system statewide would help insure that optimal decisions are made as to transportation investments. ConnDOT's model should be refined to provide time-of-day projections, new origins and destination studies, and upgraded municipal and zone-level population and employment projections.

Collaboration with Neighboring States

� Connecticut state agencies should reinforce collaboration both within the state and with appropriate agencies in neighboring states to ensure coordinated and compatible development of transportation and other infrastructure.

Enhance North-South Connectivity

� North-south connectivity in the Coastal Corridor TIA should be enhanced to alleviate congestion along east-west routes and to improve quality of life.

6. MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE

In its report to the Connecticut Regional Institute for the 21^st Century (or the �Gallis Report�), Michael Gallis & Associates summarizes the situation of the Coastal Corridor TIA in the following terms:

Connecticut�s access to the global marketplace is principally through the I-95 corridor. This corridor, with interstate and transit lines, provides access to the very dynamic New York metro region and access to the continental grid.� While the Connecticut to New York commute is largely transit-oriented, there is very little inter-city transit within Connecticut. As congestion increases in this corridor and the major global connections move west of the Hudson [River], this corridor will not offer the level of access to the economic activities and hubs necessary to support Connecticut�s institutions, businesses and people. Congestion effectively blocks economic activity from extending farther than Stamford in the [Coastal Corridor TIA].

Congestion is endemic throughout the Coastal Corridor TIA. It is acute on the primary highways, Interstate Routes I-95 and 84, and U.S. Route 1 and CT Route 15, and particularly acute on the westerly portion of Interstate Route 95. The increased congestion in the Coastal Corridor TIA is mirrored throughout the country. Employers increasingly see long commutes on congested roads as threats to productivity. Congestion also contributes to the status of much of the Coastal Corridor TIA as a �severe non-attainment area� in terms of air quality.

Significant increase in road capacity in the Coastal Corridor TIA would be expensive, would have negative environmental impacts and could encounter strong public opposition. Moreover, adding capacity to highways induces additional traffic, as people take additional car trips and new development creates even more demand.

By contrast, public transportation (rail, bus, airborne and waterborne) not only provides relief from congested roads, it lessens the negative impact on air quality and the safety hazards of traffic (especially congested traffic). Moreover, it contributes to the economy; public transportation has been found to create savings to business operations and to increase business sales, household incomes and tax revenues.[1]

If safe, convenient and integrated alternative modes of transportation were in place, there would be considerable potential to switch trips from the automobile. The opportunity to develop the following alternative modes of transportation exists in the Coastal Corridor TIA:

� Rail lines extend throughout the Coastal Corridor TIA. They are not being utilized to the extent of their capacity, although they are in urgent need of significant capital investment.

� Based on return from the farebox, Connecticut�s public bus system is one of the most productive in the country, suggesting that there is potential for increased ridership.

� The Coastal Corridor TIA has a potential air passenger market that would appear to support a secondary airport if it had an airport with a runway sufficient for small, narrow-bodied jets.

� The proximity of Long Island Sound offers the possibility of the development of high speed ferries.

� Particularly along the coast, the closeness of the origins and destinations of many trips suggests that there is considerable potential for travel by bicycle and on foot.

Recommendations

Increase Commitment to Transit

� Determine how best to enhance focus on accountability for, and commitment to, public transportation in Connecticut. Consider establishment of a separate authority responsible for transit throughout the state and a separate funding source for public transportation, such as a dedicated mass transit operating account in the state budget. Study the best practices in managing public transit, including the success of neighboring authorities, New York�s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority, in advancing public transportation in their respective regions.

Improve Access to Airports

� Improve access to metropolitan area airports by means other than single-occupancy vehicles.

A.� ROADS

Issues/Problems

Congestion in the Costal Corridor TIA affects the movement of people. Where they can reach their destinations only by road, people are trapped in the congested conditions found there and can only contribute to that congestion when traveling. But where choices exist, some will choose another mode of travel and in so doing will make no contribution to congestion on our roads. Development of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles must be our priority. Nonetheless, the automobile will remain the dominant mode by which people travel in the Coastal Corridor TIA, even as alternative modes are developed. This will require further investment in our road system.

�

Most importantly, the road system, including local roads, must be maintained in a state of good repair.

Poor or outdated engineering contributes to the inefficient movement of vehicles and gives rise to public safety concerns. Many of the Coastal Corridor TIA�s roadways were built neither to handle the volume of traffic that currently exists nor to accommodate the types of travel common today. Engineering designed to improve system efficiency such as intersection improvements, coordinated signalization, turning lanes and emergency shoulders are important elements to facilitating traffic flow through a given spot and enhancing safety.

Facilitating economic growth is a major goal of this plan, but growth that is dependent on motor vehicles could be counter-productive to that goal. Moreover, added volume on local roads, which are already congested, contributes to a degradation of quality of life. Added traffic volume would also contribute to the region�s air quality problems.

Recommendations

Roadway Improvements

� Undertake road capacity expansion projects only after a comprehensive review that takes into consideration, at a minimum, the following factors: environmental impact; all reasonable alternatives and options; impact on community character; impact on roadways in adjacent regions, even if those adjacent regions are located outside Connecticut; and impact of the proposed project on the transportation system as a whole.

� Evaluate operational and construction improvements to I-95 and Route 15 to relieve congestion and improve access in the corridor.

� With the Interstate 84 and Route 8 interchange as its priority, fund a safety and capacity study of Route 8 from Seymour to Waterbury, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(19) of the Act. Extend the study area from Waterbury to Bridgeport. This study should include an examination of gateways to provide access to downtown areas and the feasibility of designating Route 8 as an interstate highway.

� Fund the expansion of commuter parking lots in the Coastal Corridor TIA, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(2) of the Act.

� Fund the recommendations of ConnDOT�s two most recent improvement studies for Interstate I-84 which together assessed congestion and safety on the 32 miles from Waterbury to the New York state line, following the investment priorities recommended in these studies, including funding for the safety and operational improvements at Interstate I-84 interchanges from Danbury to Newtown, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(18) of the Act.

� Study the capacity and feasibility of widening Route I-95 east from New Haven to the Rhode Island state line, with consideration of environmental and sprawl impact of any large highway project and with reference to the study proposed in Section 16.(a)(14) of the Act.

� Fund ConnDOT's statewide intelligent transportation systems initiative.

Transportation Systems Management Strategies

Transportation Systems Management (TSM) is a strategy designed to maximize the efficiency of existing highway capacity through various operational and administrative mechanisms. A variety of TSM strategies have been implemented within the Coastal Corridor TIA including incident management teams, construction management programs and highway advisory radio. Few of these strategies, however, have been implemented consistently throughout the Coastal Corridor and, as a result, the benefits are fragmented.

Following a study of existing regional systems, the following TSM strategies should be implemented (on a permanent or pilot basis) where appropriate, feasible and not already in place, and appropriate benchmark data should be established:

� Entrance closures to discourage local travel on limited access highways, but only in conjunction with action to alleviate the added burden on local roads. Fund the analysis of the appropriateness of peak hour on-ramp closures on Interstate I-95, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(8) of the Act.

� Signalization improvements.

� Incident management programs to clear accidents quickly from roadways. Fund the improvement and further development of an Accident Clearance Policy to minimize the impact of accidents on Interstate I-95 and the Merritt Parkway and the enhancement of hours of truck safety stations, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(7) of the Act.

� Construction management practices that minimize the impact on traffic flow, e.g., by coordinating overlapping road improvement projects, shortening the duration of construction periods, scheduling construction during off-peak periods and providing incentives to contractors that complete work ahead of schedule

� Ramp metering to regulate the entry of vehicles into the traffic stream on limited access highways.

� Enhanced traffic enforcement.

� Highway informational radio to alert motorists to problems in time for them to alter their routes.

� Dedicated high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes.

B.� TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Issues/Problems

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies are designed to encourage commuters to modify their travel patterns and behavior in such a way as to reduce single-occupant vehicle traffic and, by extension, traffic congestion. TDM strategies support and encourage the use of transit, carpooling, vanpooling, telecommuting, compressed work schedules, staggered work times, and bicycling and walking, all of which are currently in place to one degree or another in the Coastal Corridor TIA. Another potentially effective TDM measure that is not currently in place in the Coastal Corridor TIA is value pricing.

Recommendations

� Evaluate the institution of a Value Pricing Pilot Program on one or more limited access highways in the Coastal Corridor TIA.

� Continue and expand support of existing commuter incentive programs.

� Fund marketing of the Deduct-a-Ride program, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(3) of the Act.

� Develop �commuter connections� with guaranteed rides between transportation hubs, residential areas and employment centers.

� Continue promoting and supporting employer-based TDM programs at major employment centers in the Coastal Corridor TIA, and continue to expand TDM programs to smaller employers where appropriate.

� Increase availability of commuter information and services (e.g., parking availability, transit ticket purchases) on the Internet through consolidation and coordination of existing transportation web sites and improved user utility.

� Increase funding for marketing of all transportation alternatives and coordinate marketing under a single brand identity (while allowing for local customization by transportation organizations).

� Consider expansion of existing employer trip reduction tax credit and other incentives.

C.� COMMUTER AND INTERCITY RAIL

Issues/Problems

There are 575 route miles of railroad track in Connecticut owned by eleven separate entities. Passenger service over this patchwork of rail ownership is provided by three entities. Pursuant to a contract among ConnDOT, New York State�s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and the Metro North Commuter Railroad, Metro North provides service on the New Haven main line from New York City to New Haven and over the three branch lines: New Canaan branch, Danbury branch, and Waterbury branch. Under contract with ConnDOT, Amtrak operates the Shore Line East service east of New Haven over the trackage it owns. In addition, Amtrak provides intercity service from New York to Boston via New London and from New York to Hartford and Springfield, using ConnDOT trackage west of New Haven and its own trackage north and east of New Haven.

Commuter service over the former New York, New Haven and Hartford (NYNH&H) line has long been a vital transportation amenity in the Coastal Corridor TIA. Traditionally this link has primarily provided access by Connecticut residents to jobs in New York City, but increasingly it is being used by so-called reverse commuters, New York City residents who work in Connecticut, and intra-state Connecticut commuters. Overall, ridership has increased by 41 percent since 1984 and by nearly 100 percent since 1970, and reverse and intra-state commutes were up 47 percent between 1995 and 2000.[2] Unfortunately, this increase in ridership has resulted in a shortage of seats, but no new rail cars have been added to the fleet used to service the New Haven line in almost a decade. The bulk of the passenger cars owned by ConnDOT and used on the New Haven line are M-2 type electrical multiple unit rail cars and are nearly 30 years old, which is past their anticipated useful life.

More frequent service to more destinations will make the railroad a more attractive alternative to the automobile. During off-peak hours, existing stops between New Haven and Stamford is hourly and between Stamford and New York is half-hourly. A �subway/shuttle� service, offering customers trains every 15 or 20 minutes would make train service more convenient and thus more comparable to use of the automobile.

Recommendations

Order New Rail Cars Immediately

� Ordering the new equipment necessary to maintain the existing level and maintain reliability of service must be our first priority, given the lengthy time required for specification, manufacture and delivery. ConnDOT and MTA/Metro North have identified an immediate need for 10 locomotives and 60 push/pull coaches to maintain the existing level and reliability of service, and to increase intrastate service. In addition, they estimate that by 2030 well over 500 passenger cars may be required to replace the existing fleet and provide for future growth in ridership.[3]

Infrastructure

� To properly maintain and store the new equipment and overhaul the existing M-2 fleet, the site selection and acquisition and the design of the needed new storage and maintenance facility should begin as soon as possible, as this facility must be completed before delivery of new equipment. Fund the site selection study for the expansion of the New Haven Line rail maintenance facilities� capacity and purchase land for a new rail service maintenance facility, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(5) of the Act.

� Both to ensure service reliability and to permit Amtrak�s Acela trains to operate at higher speed, the replacement of the obsolete catenaries should be accelerated.

� Either change the electrical current used east of New Haven to the same current used west of New Haven or modify Metro North electrical rail cars to use the current east of New Haven. This will permit Metro North electrical rail cars to operate east of New Haven.

� Any construction of limited-access busways should include provision for their conversion to rail or light-rail as future demand warrants.

Stations

� Following a review of commutation and residency patterns, a fair distribution of additional parking and other access facilities at rail stations needed to meet demand, both existing and anticipated, should be determined. On the basis of this review, a strategy should be devised to construct the additional facilities needed, and to offer consistent access and pricing to all motorists using parking facilities. Station access facilities should include strategies other than vehicular, including bus, jitney, walking and bicycling.

� A strategy should be devised to ensure the availability of shuttles or taxis at the arrival and departure times of trains throughout the day (not just at peak commuter hours) at the principal railroad station in each town served by Metro North and Shore Line East.

Expanded Service

� Increase service on Metro North by offering more frequent, �subway/shuttle� service.

� Integrate the services offered by Metro North and Shore Line East into a single, seamless service. This integration should not be structured as only a two-year trial, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(9) of the Act.

� Implement the improvements in the Danbury Branch Line from Norwalk to New Milford proposed by the Route 7 Travel Options Implementation Plan.

� Update the study of expansion of service on the Waterbury Branch Line.

� Operate more trains from and to east of Stamford to and from Greenwich without requiring a change in Stamford.

� Expand destinations served by Metro North to include Penn Station in New York City, Hartford, Springfield, MA, Providence, RI, and intermediate destinations. This action would permit rail customers to choose between Metro North and Amtrak to many destinations.

� Fund the design study for an Orange/West Haven rail station, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(4) of the Act.

� Support an alternative stop by Amtrak�s Acela train at Bridgeport.

� Fund the study of the infrastructure cost and operating characteristics of rail commuter services from New Haven to Springfield, including Bradley Airport, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(17) of the Act.

� Funding of the proposal to partner with Amtrak to provide an additional peak period train from Connecticut to Penn Station, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(10) of the Act, is not recommended.

Metro North Operating Agreement

� Use all available means under the existing service agreement among ConnDOT, the MTA and Metro North to improve Connecticut rail transit including, if possible, obtaining a seat on the MTA board.

D.� BUS TRANSIT

Issues/Problems

Connecticut�s local bus system is one of the most productive systems in the country, with an average return from the farebox of 36 percent and with some districts returning over 40 percent. This compares with an industry average of 35 percent.[4] This high productivity suggests that there is potential for increased ridership.

While buses are nonetheless a major provider of public transit in Connecticut, investment in bus transit in Connecticut has remained relatively flat. This funding �containment� philosophy has limited Connecticut�s bus system from enjoying a much larger market share and prevented it from contributing to its fullest extent to the reduction of congestion and air pollution. Connecticut must move from an incremental or �containment� funding philosophy and invest new dollars in both operating and capital for bus operations.

Connecticut�s bus system is faced with a $2.5 million projected operating deficit this year alone.[5] To address this deficit, several thousand hours of revenue bus service will have to be cut, and some transit districts will have to raise fares just to make ends meet. As with our rail service, we are failing to provide our bus system with the funding it needs.

Recommendations

Consolidation of Bus Services

� Study whether consolidation of agencies that operate buses in the state and/or the Coastal Corridor TIA would enhance operating and planning efficiency.

Expanded Service

� Implement recommendations for more bus service contained in the �Connecticut DOT�s Statewide Bus System Study� (July 2000).

� Expand Fairfield County inter-regional service by purchasing ten new buses (including articulated buses for the coastal link) and provide funding for additional local bus service, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(11) of the Act.

� Where the demand exists, provide for more inter-district, inter-town, inter-regional bus routes like the Coastal Link, including routes linking rural communities.

� Improve bus services for the elderly and the disabled.

� Consider extension of the Hartford to New Britain Busway, to and from Waterbury.

� Develop (a) operational and fiscal plans for the expansion of local and regional bus services to coordinate with rail and ferry schedules for service to area attractions, and (b) a single ticket fare and fare media structure for rail, bus and ferry services, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(13) of the Act. The fare structure should be integrated with a statewide Deduct-A-Ride program.

� Fund expansion of bus services connecting with rail services in the Coastal Corridor TIA, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(6) of the Act.

� Fund expansion of bus services for existing and new western Connecticut commuters to utilize Metro-North's Upper Harlem Line for commuting to New York City and White Plains, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(12) of the Act.

� Consider the introduction of Bus Rapid Transit projects in the Coastal Corridor TIA similar to the Hartford Bus Rapid Transit project, including the feasibility of using state or interstate routes for Bus Rapid Transit Demonstration projects.

Job Access

� Fund the Jobs Access Program that provides later evening bus service route extensions and customized paratransit services for residents in the cities of Bridgeport, New Haven and Waterbury, as proposed in Section 16.(a)(1) of the Act.

� Incorporate all effective Job Access Program services now funded from grants in the operating budgets of transit districts.

� Where demand exists, provide service to all major job centers, including retail centers on Saturdays and Sundays.

Marketing

� Develop a comprehensive, regional bus marketing campaign for the Coastal Corridor TIA, taking advantage of the national efforts to enhance poor public perception of public transportation.

� Improve buses� image by making buses more attractive and user-friendly, for example, by discontinuing the practice of darkening bus windows with advertising or other materials that restrict visual contact between passengers and the surrounding streetscape.

Miscellaneous

� Provide both funding and incentives to transit operations to use cleaner fuels like compressed natural gas.

E.� WATERBORNE

Issues/Problems

The state has funded a comprehensive study to explore utilizing Connecticut�s waterway system further to expand the potential for movement of people within the Coastal Corridor TIA. The infrastructure (Long Island Sound) has been in place for thousands of years, and its capacity for ferry service is infinitely expandable. There is an existing ferry service between Bridgeport and Port Jefferson. Several private ferry operators have indicated an interest in providing service on high speed ferries, so that the service may require no operating subsidy from the state. While there are land access and parking issues, such an operation would require minimal capital investment from the state.

Recommendations

� Fund infrastructure improvements (e.g., dredging, bulkheading, and passenger facilities) to insure that a ferry operation interfaces with the Bridgeport Intermodal Facility. The funding of a high speed ferry from Bridgeport to Stamford to New York, as proposed by Section 16.(a)(20) of the Act, should be limited to such infrastructure improvements.

F.� AIRBORNE

Issues/Problems

Six airports � Danbury Municipal Airport, Waterbury-Oxford Airport, Sikorsky Airport, Tweed-New Haven Airport, Meriden Markham Airport and the Griswold Airport � are located in the Coastal Corridor TIA, but only Tweed-New Haven provides commercial air service. However, commercial service is available from Westchester County Airport which is located immediately adjacent to the southwestern border of the Coastal Corridor TIA.

A significant percentage of the persons who live and work in the Coastal Corridor TIA rely on New York airports to meet their commercial air travel needs, thereby contributing to road congestion. However, a significant market exists for expanded commercial air travel in Connecticut and the economic impacts of expanded commercial air travel opportunities would boost Connecticut�s economy.

Recommendation

� Conduct a study of statewide airport resources and needs, including airports owned by the state, municipalities and private interests, which among other things should determine the need for one or more regional or �secondary� airport within the Coastal Corridor TIA attractive to commercial air carriers capable of flying to destinations of up to 1,000 miles.

G. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES

Issues/Problems

With the adoption of the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), Congress recognized that bicycling and walking should be integral parts of a multi-modal approach to transportation and made funding available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This support continues in the Transportation Equity Act of the 21^st Century (TEA-21).

Despite the availability of this funding, little has been done in the Coastal Corridor TIA to improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians. However, ConnDOT acknowledges that bicycle and pedestrian trips in Connecticut have been below the national average and that a significant number of trips could be switched from the automobile.[6] The close proximity within the Coastal Corridor TIA of many residential areas, businesses and shopping areas and recreational facilities makes bicycling and walking viable travel options. Although both are short-range transportation choices, when used in conjunction with public transit or rideshare lots the range can be much greater.

Recommendations

� The cost of developing bicycle and pedestrian facilities is low as compared with the cost of development of road or rail facilities. A cost-efficient way to integrate bicycling and walking into the transportation infrastructure would be for ConnDOT, in respect of state roads, and MPOs, in respect of county and local roads that are part of regional Transportation Improvement Projects, routinely to include bike/ped improvements in all projects involving such roads. The U.S. Department of Transportation has adopted a policy statement to this effect which is designed for adoption at the state and local levels, and this policy statement should be both adopted and followed by ConnDOT and the MPOs in the Coastal Corridor TIA.

� Each regional planning agency of the Coastal Corridor TIA should adopt a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for its region.

� Greater funding should be provided for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, particularly greenway projects incorporating multi-use paths where such greenways extend through well-traveled transportation corridors.

� Establish a pedestrian set-aside in ConnDOT's local aid program that would provide municipalities with moneys to construct sidewalks and implement traffic-calming projects.

� Equip buses and commuter trains for the carriage of bicycles.

7.�� MOVEMENT OF GOODS

Generating more transportation alternatives such as waterborne and rail intermodal should be an objective of the State of Connecticut. More choices for shippers and receivers would promote Connecticut�s business climate. Increasing and improving transportation options would assist in improving the flow of goods into, out of, and through Connecticut while improving highway safety and air quality.

Seventy-four percent of the volume of commodities that travel into, out of, and through Connecticut travel by trucks that enter the state, including 38 percent of the traffic destined for Connecticut and 44 percent of the traffic passing through the state. This mode of transport carries with it a disproportionate level of safety and environmental concerns as compared to rail and waterborne alternatives.[7] Commodities carried cover the range of all the products necessary for human life and economic well being.

Recommendation

� Create shipper alternatives such as improved rail, efficient rail intermodal and waterborne routes. Shippers must be convinced there are cost-effective, efficient alternatives to our highways.

A.� RAIL

Issues/Problems

Connecticut shares heavy truck traffic on I-95 with other interstates from Virginia to Maine. Connecticut needs to develop the alternative choice of truck-competitive, intermodal rail freight.

Connecticut�s existing �cul-de-sac� or dead ended rail freight system must be promptly and effectively transformed so as to provide a rail freight option with intermodal connections. This new rail freight service must operate on the fastest, most direct rail lines along the I-95 corridor.

Operating track capacity on the New Haven Line was dramatically increased in the 1980s as the result of signal improvements and even with an increase in commuter rail service there will be hours in the 24-hour �day� when rail freight trains could operate.

Recommendations

� As soon as possible, start directing rail freight operations through Penn Station tunnels during off-peak hours for perishable shipments (such as an extension northward to New England of the CSX �Orange Blossom Special�), RoadRailer, mail and express and high priority container-on-flat-car trains.

� Actively advocate and support a new, direct, rail freight connection across the Hudson River and/or New York Harbor at New York City. The feasibility of the New York Cross Harbor rail tunnel has been proven, and environmental and planning studies are well under way. Connecticut should support and encourage this bold and timely capital investment in our national rail freight network.

� In addition, added cross-Hudson rail capacity is needed at Penn Station. Connecticut should get involved and work for freight as well as passenger use of any additions to track and tunnel capacity at this vital point.

� Encourage consideration of additional Hudson River rail crossings.

� Encourage, rather than discourage, high speed off-peak truck-competitive rail freight usage of the New Haven Line, the Springfield Line and the New Haven to Boston Northeast Corridor.

� Resume the past policy of improving rather than disinvesting in rail overhead and side clearances. Actively consider the cost benefit of improving such clearances as well as the economic and environmental penalty for failing to do so.

� Act now to preserve valuable and difficult to replace rail freight yard and terminal space, especially at New Haven (Cedar Hill Yard), at Hartford (North Meadows) and, working with Rhode Island, at Providence (Northrup Avenue Yard).

� The issues relating to rail freight in Connecticut are poorly understood. This is especially true in terms of the geographic relationships between freight haulers and potential changes to East Coast service routes as may affect Connecticut. A clearly written inventory report, to serve as a base for all freight planning and possible public investment, is immediately needed.

B.� TRUCKS

Issues/Problems

� The U.S. has an extremely comprehensive and efficient highway system which has reached capacity. In order for Connecticut to deal with the current level of traffic congestion, the state must find ways to get more out of its existing assets by making it more efficient. This is, in fact, a goal of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

� ConnDOT has determined that truck-only routes are more cost effective than other transportation modes for shipments less than 500 to 1,000 miles.[8]

� ConnDOT has found that trucks make up only 8 to 15 percent of peak hour traffic at the New York/Connecticut border and, while trucks are equivalent to as many as four passenger vehicles, they also are more likely to be traveling longer distances than the passenger cars.[9]

� Diesel trucks account for a disproportionate amount of the state�s greatest non-point source of air pollution � traffic � thereby contributing to the region�s status as a �severe non-attainment area� in terms of air quality.[10]

Recommendations

Strategies/Policies

� Address the severe shortage of areas where tired truckers can rest along state highways. Explore a public-private partnership with commercial truck stop owners to operate facilities to provide safe and secure areas for truckers to rest.

� Work with local interests to encourage non-peak movement of goods where it does not conflict with quality of life issues.

� Encourage establishment of warehousing, distribution and cargo transportation facilities in the New Haven/Hartford/Springfield corridor, perhaps a �cluster� like effort.

� Become an active participant in the discussions and decision-making concerning any new east coast port development or expansions, in order to affect decisions as to cargo routing options.

� Re-invest in staff and facilities to strengthen Connecticut�s safety and diesel truck emissions testing.

Projects/Studies

� Conduct detailed origin and destination studies on all freight moving into, out of, and through Connecticut, on all transportation modes. Include surveys of all businesses in the state to determine flexibility of shipping and receiving activities, types of products or supplies transported, schedule requirements and proximity to intermodal facilities.

C.� WATERBORNE

Issues/Problems

� The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has established a Port Inland Distribution Network (PIDN) system due to overcrowded port facilities and capacity.

� Projected container shipments into New England has been estimated at 386,000 by 2010 and 609,000 by 2020. Clearly road congestion will get much worse if freight activities continue.[11]

� Two feasibility studies were conducted by Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency (GBRPA) and South Central Regional Council of Governments (SCRCOG) in 2000 for implementing shipping containers by barge over the 70 miles of water to and from Bridgeport port/New Haven port and the New York/New Jersey port. If implemented, that container service would be able to reduce trailer trucks in the highly congested 33-mile stretch of I-95 from Greenwich to Bridgeport or the 53-mile stretch to New Haven.

� The creation of a Bridgeport/New Haven container facility would eliminate up to 80,000 tractor trailer trucks from this section of I-95.[12] With a diminished number of trucks on the road, air quality and highway safety are destined to improve.

Recommendations

� Support Section 16(a)(21) of the Act, to create container barge feeder port and service in Bridgeport and New Haven.

� Create �port zones� around our deep water ports to restrict non-water dependent uses and to make our port areas more efficient and more secure.

� Establish more efficient dredge permit procedures and seek affordable dredge disposal alternatives to insure the smooth functioning of our maritime commerce and which results in the least damaging environmental impact or a net positive environmental gain.

� Accelerate restoration of rail service to the Port of New Haven.

8. �� LAND USE ISSUES

When the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company built the New Haven line in the 1840s, it was built to serve commercial and industrial uses as well as passenger needs in the urban centers of six regions of the Coastal Corridor TIA. The post-World War II development of interstate highways and increased use of private automobiles, as well as a shift in commercial uses away from central cities, allowed people to reach farther out into the suburbs to find places to live and work. There is considerable consensus that the resulting separation of home and work has led to greater congestion on local and regional road networks, declining air quality, and creation of a �placeless� landscape that have affected all of the municipalities in the TIA and the state.

Transportation and land use planning should have similar end-goals in mind: efficient use of a limited resource (land) that allows for efficient movement of goods and people and creation of strong communities. However, in Connecticut, transportation and land use decisions are usually made separately, even though each profoundly affects the other, and both have strong impacts on the local and regional quality of life. As a result of this disjoined decision making, the TIA is consuming much of its land without improving its mobility.

Another key issue for transportation, of severe proportions in much of Connecticut, is the fact that affordable housing for the local work force is not available in proximity to places of employment. Municipal policy supports this mismatch by encouraging fiscally positive (business and industry) and discouraging fiscally negative (moderate income housing) land uses in order to enhance the local property tax. Thus, the journey to work becomes longer and longer as affordable housing recedes over the miles to the next region. There needs to be a stronger link between affordable housing and transit services.

The challenge facing the Coastal Corridor TIA today is to think beyond specific disciplines to create a �multi-modal� approach and managed land use planning for municipal and regional development. A starting point may be found in discussion of the following general questions:

� What incentives exist to create synergistic transportation and land use plans?

� What incentives exist to develop inter-municipal, or inter-regional, or whole-state plans?

� What common assets do the suburban communities share with central cities and how can transportation and land use linkages make the highest and best use of those assets at the local, regional, and state levels?

Issues/Problems

� Strong �home rule� sentiments are counter-current to regional transportation/land use planning efforts in southwest Connecticut.

� The Connecticut Conservation and Development Policy Plan has little effect on the realities of municipal planning processes.

� ConnDOT relies on traditional planning models rather than integrating transportation strategies with goal-oriented plans of conservation and development.

� As the Transportation Strategy Board seeks to promote inter-regional efforts to improve Connecticut�s transportation services delivery system, ConnDOT proposes to shift responsibility for the acquisition of rights-of-way and land for transportation projects from the state to municipalities. This policy change may result in barriers to the development of inter-municipal transportation projects such as increased legal costs, increased cost of land and project delays.

Recommendations

� Re-establish a Statewide Planning Division within the Connecticut Office of Policy Management for the comprehensive coordination and monitoring of various short- and long-range plans including but not limited to the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut, the Master Transportation Plan, the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), various regional plans of conservation and development, various regional long-range transportation plans, and town and city plans of conservation and development.

� Strengthen adherence to the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut.

� Evaluate, formulate and implement state subsidized incentives to encourage increased land use clustering, mixed-use development, transit accessibility and pedestrian-oriented development.

� Establish state recognized �Transportation Zone Areas of Development� with associated incentives to encourage their development and use.

� Avoid highway and road expansion projects in areas that the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut classifies as �Preservation Areas� wherever possible.

� Evaluate, formulate and implement incentives to encourage �Transit-Oriented Development.�

� Evaluate, formulate and implement incentives to encourage �infill� development in urban areas and existing transportation corridors.

� Evaluate, formulate and implement changes in eligibility requirements for various �brownfield� programs and implement new incentive programs specifically encouraging �brownfield� redevelopment in urban areas and existing transportation corridors.

� Evaluate, formulate and implement incentives to encourage the development of new housing stock in areas with demonstrated job demand as well as adjacent to newly established �Transportation Zones.�

� Evaluate, formulate and implement incentives to encourage the re-drafting of local and municipal zoning regulations to allow for more intensive �mixed-use� development.

� Institute a program by which ConnDOT will develop the requisite skills and capacity to consider and model the impacts different transportation policies will have on environmental, land use and �quality of life� issues.

� Streamline existing environmental review and approvals processes to eliminate duplication of efforts and enhance coordination among local, state and federal agencies.

� Develop and implement a project-ratings scale that prioritizes state funding for projects located in transportation corridors and transportation zones.

� Require that all municipalities (a) include a bus circulation element in their plan of conservation and development and (b) include specific congestion mitigation plans (including funding sources) to mitigate the increased burden of congestion from any new or proposed development project.

� Upgrade planning coordination between Connecticut and the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, which is the planning agency for metropolitan New York City.

9.�� FUNDING ISSUES

It is clear to our TIA that Connecticut can no longer rely largely on federal funding for the vast majority of its transportation capital and operating needs. Additional state funding for transportation is needed, or the Connecticut economy will stagnate. The current tax structure does little to encourage the movement of people or freight in the most cost-effective and efficient manner.

Issues/Problems

� Connecticut�s transportation planning and systems need significant modernization in order to support the state�s economic development and quality of life.

� Implementing a new transportation strategy will require substantial financial investment in addition to continuing existing levels of federal, state and local support.

� New sources of transportation revenue, increasing the levels of current funding and gaining more flexibility in the use of current funding will be necessary to meet future needs.

� The active participation of the business community is critical in order to gain the support of public policymakers and the general public for a new strategic plan for transportation and the necessary funding.

� Although the state spending cap does a good job in ensuring that state government does not spend above the means of the growth of our economy, the cap on operational spending substantially limits growth potential in transportation spending. Transportation spending must vie each year with other state spending needs.

� Revenue projections indicate motor fuel tax revenue will not increase and the Special Transportation Fund will incur a deficit.

Recommendations

� Examine procurement policies and practices to ensure that competitive bidding, based on the highest and best value criteria, is used as a tool for containing costs and maximizing level and quality of service, particularly with long-term service contracts.

� Connecticut�s federal, state and local elected and community delegations must create a unified approach to obtaining more funding from the federal government as reauthorization of TEA-21 approaches. In addition, Connecticut needs to work with other northeastern states to obtain additional funding and funding flexibility. A comprehensive strategy to communicate this unified message should be developed.

� Evaluate value pricing and/or congestion pricing programs as recommended in the �Movement of People� section of this plan.

� Create enabling legislation allowing municipalities or regions to develop transportation related tax incentives and impose impact fees.¹³

� Create Benefit Assessment Districts.

� Explore the use of Tax Increment Financing.

� Explore innovative financing options:

a) State Infrastructure Banks

b) Turnkey Procurement

c) Advance Construction Authority

d) Leasing Rights of Way

� Study the feasibility of converting Connecticut Transit bus contracts from �management� contracts to �service� contracts, thus creating a �shared risk� in bus transit financial performance.

� Maintain transit fares at levels which encourage use of mass transit modes, and adjust subsidies to cover operational and maintenance deficits.

� Develop a formula-based allocation of operating funding for all transit districts. The formula may be driven by such variables as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), revenue generation/units, local community contributions, ridership, service to elderly and handicapped populations, demographics, population, revenue per passenger, cost per hour, population density (etc.).

� Create an incentive program that would encourage local communities to contribute more to public transportation programs in their regions.

� Reward companies with policies and programs that help limit traffic congestion.

� Increase mass transit funding with a dedicated funding source.

� Encourage revenue bonding at the state and local levels for capital infrastructure improvements.

� Increase funding levels for Town Aid to Roads.

� Consider establishment of a separate authority for transit, as recommended in the �Movement of People� section of this plan.

� Provide separate funding of the Connecticut Port Authority.

ENDNOTES