Personal Rapid Transit - Operations Research and Financial

Personal Rapid Transit A Transportation Plan for New Jersey

by Professor Alain L Kornhauser PhD

Students in Orf_467_F2010

Department of Operations Research amp Financial Engineering Princeton University

January 2011

Project Contributors

Atlantic County Anna Zhao Bergen County Sida Huang Burlington County Taylor Stewart-Cannon Camden County Alexandre Faust Cape May Felicia Yau Cumberland County Jonathan Erlichman Kexin Christina Ren Essex County Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Gloucester County Jonathan Erlichman Kexing Christina Ren Hudson County Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Hunterdon County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Mercer County James Connolly Middlesex County Juan Mazzini Monmouth County Julio Fredes Caroline Logue Morris County Ican Kleinfeld Ocean County Caroline Logue Julio Fredes Passaic County Hillary Ford Salem County Jonathan Erlichman Kexing Christina Ren Somerset County Thomas Wells Sussex County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Union County Ma Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Warren County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Programming Team John Valentino Ethan Goldstein Nathan

Keyes Justin Fu Leadership Team Talal Mufti Michael Yaroshefsky

Contents

1 Executive Summary 4

2 PRT Details and News 5

3 Programming Team Report 7

4 Atlantic County 12

5 Bergen County 31

6 Burlington County 40

7 Camden County 53

8 Cape May County 66

9 Cumberland County 77

10 Essex County 0

11 Gloucester County 22

12 Hudson County 31

13 Hunterdon County 48

14 Mercer County 52

15 Middlesex County 70

16 Monmouth County 84

17 Morris County 106

18 Ocean County 124

19 Passaic County 143

20 Salem County 160

21 Somerset County 169

22 Sussex County 184

23 Union County 190

24 Warren County 223

1 Executive Summary

11 What is Personal Rapid Transit Personal Rapid Transit is a hybrid between personal private transportation and public transportation Using small passenger pods traveling along a dedicated guideway a PRT network is a fully automated transportation system that ferries passengers between stations Unlike other modes of public transportation the PRT system allows passengers to ride in privacy with other passengers of their choosing it uses tiny vehicles that allows for a smaller infrastructure footprint and it allows passengers to use the service on demand PRT is convenient fuel-efficient and cost-effective

12 What is the history of PRT1

An essential premise of PRT is that people prefer the end-to-end transit convenience afforded by personal vehicles a convenience emulated by PRT The concept arose in the 1960s as the suggestion of a Housing and Urban Development study Numerous PRT implementations were designed for major United States cities but the first to become a reality was in Morgantown West Virginia in the 1970s The United Arab Emirates recently launched a PRT system in the planned city of Masdar in which the system provides the primary means of transit

13 What are the benefits of PRT Based on the modeling done by our team members we believe that a PRT network would benefit the residents of New Jersey in measurable important ways such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions and less disturbance to communities

Because the PRT vehicles are designed to be light and energy-efficient they use less energy than automobiles Also since they run on electricity the energy to power a PRT network can come from a diverse portfolio of energy generation modes especially renewable sources Consequently PRT systems can dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions

For communities PRT systems will be less disruptive than automobiles since the guideways are mostly elevated thereby freeing up space for pedestrians and other uses Further PRT vehicles generate less noise and vibration than automobiles resulting in quieter operation and less disruption By taking vehicles off the road and letting passengers use PRT system we are making our communities better

14 What might a PRT network in New Jersey look like In the report below we detail a county-by-county breakdown of what a PRT network that could serve New Jersey might look like This network has a total of 10076 miles of guideway and 9281 unique stations and it could be built over a 20-year period for a cost of $1107 billion

1 httpfacultywashingtonedujbsitransPRTHistoryhtml

2 PRT Details and News

21 Fundamentals of Personal Rapid Transit Technology The defining characteristics of PRT include

bull On-demand origin-to-destination service The PRT traveler indicates his destination and a vehicle already at the station or one sent to the station takes this passenger to his destination

bull Small fully-automated vehicles Vehicles are computer-controlled and are completely automated Each carries approximately the same number of passengers as a passenger vehicle

bull Exclusive-use guideways Like trains PRT vehicles travel only on guideways and should be designed to prevent at-grade crossings usually through elevated guideays

bull Off-line stations Stations are designed so that a vehicle stopping to let a passenger disembark will not delay other vehicles passing by

bull A network or system of fully-connected guideways Similar to vehicles on roads PRT vehicles travel on an interconnected network or guideway with junctions and intersections and may use all guideways and stations in the network

22 Recent Developments in PRT Technology Recent technological improvements have made PRT systems more viable and less costly For example battery charging technology has advanced enough to obviate the need to have electricity provided along the guideway Computer systems have also become fast enough that the vehicles can guide themselves without the need for the track to physically direct them Further as the global community becomes more interested in sustainable transportation methods PRT comes out as a positive alternative to conventional transportation systems Numerous websites also keep track of developments in PRT technology around the world

bull httpkineticseattlewausprthtml bull httpfacultywashingtonedujbsitransprtquickhtm

221 Case Study Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 The BAA a private company that owns Heathrow Airport wanted to develop a transportation system for the airport that would satisfy the following criteria

1) Low emissions 2) High level-of-service 3) Efficient use of space 4) Good value for money

Although BAA considered other transportation methods such as buses and people movers it determined that a PRT system would provide a 60 improvement in travel time and a 40 operating cost savings2

BAA and ULTra PRT inked a deal in late 2007 for a PRT system to serve the link between Terminal 5 and the N3 Business Car Park The system involves a 12 mile journey between the two stations and includes 21 vehicles The system is currently undergoing testing by employees of the airport and the results seem to indicate that the system will be successful when it opens its doors for public usage

222 Case Study City of Masdar Abu Dhabi When in 2007 the government of Abu Dhabi said that they wanted to build a carbon-neutral city they included an advanced PRT system in their plans because of the technologys zero-emission vehicles and low energy demands The system is currently undergoing testing3 and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has recently signed on as a partner4

223 Case Study Morgantown West Virginia

The first commercial success of a PRT system was the West Virginia University PRT system which was conceived designed constructed and opened in the 1970s The system was completed in 1975 after a cost of over $60 million The system is comprised of five stations and 73 pod vehicles that ferry passengers automatically to their destinations It currently provides a 98 service availability rate which is higher than the original 965 goal

2 httpwwwultraprtcomheathrow 3 httpfacultywashingtonedujbsitransMasdar-eco-cityhtm 4 httpwwwzawyacomstorycfmsidZAWYA20110115121857

23 Summary Data The table below describes the infrastructure requirements of the PRT project

Stations Interchanges Guideway (mi) Atlantic County 330 433 41916 Bergen County 612 607 52604 Burlington County 573 513 60149 Camden County 512 485 59836 Cape May County 204 111 19775 Cumberland County 291 182 39706 Essex County 741 623 43684 Gloucester County 434 210 47249 Hudson County 232 205 14981 Hunterdon County 144 79 29016 Mercer County 491 460 47885 Middlesex County 698 717 73355 Monmouth County 681 253 73070 Morris County 334 218 41396 Ocean County 702 290 75555 Passaic County 369 381 55004 Salem County 173 49 18389 Somerset County 548 170 49400 Sussex County 473 305 93098 Union County 640 1024 46408 Warren County 99 102 25094 Total 9281 7417 1007570

3 Programming Team Report Google Earth is an embeddable plugin that ldquoallows you to navigate and explore geographic data on a 3D globe using a web browserrdquo Customized specifically for modeling PRT networks the website provides tools to build networks by superimposing images of Placemarks (ie stations interchanges etc) and Guideway (lines connecting Placemarks) on a satellite image of New Jersey provided by Google Placemarks indicating homes businesses and other points of interest can also be displayed The website interfaces with a backend database to store the networks created and also provides a calculation engine that runs network analytics computing statistics and financials about the network Significant improvements were made to the

website as detailed below The most current version of the website can be accessed here and the previous version available here for comparison

31 User Interface Enhancements bull Rubber-Banding Previously new Placemarks could not be built on existing Guideway editing

required first manually deleting the existing Guideway then putting the new Placemark on the map and finally re-inserting the Guideway as desired To allow for more intuitive and flexible network editing the ldquoRubber-Bandingrdquo feature was added This allows new Placemarks to be lsquodroppedrsquo or lsquosplicedrsquo into an existing Guideway connection without having to delete and rebuild the existing line This feature uses a minimum bounding-box and slope-matching search algorithm to automatically determine when Rubber-Banding should occur (ie to decide whether the user is inserting a new Placemark onto an existing Guideway versus building a new Placemark not on an existing Guideway) Once a Placemark is added with the Rubber-Banding it can then be dragged to the desired location with the attached Guideway automatically re-adjusting to the new location

bull Coverage Map In the model each station serves people within a frac14 mile radius To visually depict this modeling assumption the Coverage Map option allows users to create a geographic map of the area their network covers To do so a frac14 mile radius circle is drawn around each station in the network Guideways and all other Placemarks are not included in the Coverage Map The Coverage Map can be toggled on-off building new Stations can also be done with the Coverage Map activated so the coverage area of new stations can be seen during network construction Future versions may address the time complexity issues of the Coverage Map ndash as Google Earth does not provide a generic circle drawing feature each Stationrsquos coverage map is constructed by plotting a series of plots around the Station a very time intensive loop This issue may be resolved by using enlarged Placemarks instead of drawing circles Updates to the feature may also include transparent or semi-transparent coverage maps

bull Year Building This update allows time to be accounted for in network construction by letting users specify a year in which the specific Placemark was constructed This is an editable parameter ranging from Year 1 to Year 20 Future site versions will more thoroughly use this data in analyzing network statistics

bull Year Map This feature is in essence a combination of the Coverage Map and Year Building above It allows users to visually see the evolution of their networks over time in the form of a time-based coverage map All Stations built on or prior to the selected year are colored with the frac14 mile radius circle with all newer stations still visible but not colored A slider bar changes the selected year displaying a year-by-year animated map of network coverage As with the Coverage Map future versions may look to improve the time efficiency of the Year Map Other updates may display the Year Map for only a specific year or may use colors to distinguish the different years of construction

bull Display Mode This feature customizes the network for display purposes It removes all non-Station Placemarks and reduces the size of the Station Placemarks When displaying the network over a large geographical region this feature removes clutter so important network characteristics can be more easily identified Another interesting display feature would be to resize Stations (or even Guideways) according to the relative proportion of passengers served by

that Station Such a display may even take advantage of Google Earthrsquos ability to create 3-dimensional Placemarks

bull Other Updates and Suggestions A variety of other site updates were implemented as well These include fixes to the ldquoCounty Placemarks to Viewrdquo section Placemark naming and infrastructure development for the Loading Bar Future versions may consider some of the suggestions above or the following updates features

o Automatic Guideway Generation This function would automatically generate Guideways to connect existing user-built Placemarks This feature could be used to decrease the time needed for network construction or could be used as a baseline metric to make comparisons with the user-built network This feature could be based on an adapted minimum spanning tree algorithm

o Curved Guideways Currently to build non-linear Guideways users must use ShapePoints to make a series of small (linear) connected Guideways approximating the shape desired While appropriate for angled city-block layouts this is suboptimal for the curving nature of suburban roads One approach would allow users to lsquodrawrsquo Guideways using the mouse as a stylus Another option may be to allow users to shape existing Guideways by clicking on an existing line segment and drag it to the desired location without ShapePoints A curved Guideway improvement may include some of the automatic Guideway generation techniques mentioned above

o Automatic Naming Allow the system to automatically label Stations The passenger use of each Station can be estimated from existing data so an interesting approach would be to label Stations with the name of the largest nearby trip productionattraction This would require a lsquosmartrsquo approach to avoid naming nearby Stations the same

o 3D Tour This feature would make use of Google Earthrsquos 3D and StreetView technology functionality by letting users to lsquotake a ridersquo in the constructed PRT network After users select an origin and destination the tour would zoom to ground level and progress (at street level) along the path outlined by the PRT network There is no better way to test a PRT then to actually try it out

32 Server-Side Scripting Enhancements

bull Placemark Upload Page The Placemark Upload Page is an interface for the user to upload a CSV file of county Placemarks with population and other trip information for a given latitude and longitude The upload page processes this CSV file and automatically adds the Placemarks to the database and outputs them to a KML file that can be read by the Google Earth interface to display the Placemarks while users are builting their networks This page replaces a process that was previously accomplished manually with the help of a Python script This page keeps track of previous versions of the CSV file that have been uploaded although there is not yet a way to make these previous versions accessible to the user A simple future improvement would be to create a user interface for accessing these previous file versions

bull Network Combine Page The Network Combine Page takes custom networks saved by users and combines them into one network so that it can be loaded into the Google Earth interface

worked on and analyzed as one unit It works by parsing the KML files generated when the user saves a custom network and combining them into one file updating Placemark ID numbers and other properties to maintain the integrity of the combined KML file

bull Network Matrices Page The Network Matrices Page analyzes a custom network file by computing three matrices

o Line-of-sight distances between each pair of stations o Adjacency matrix to indicate if the row station is directly connected to a column station

possibly passing through shape points or interchanges but not other stations o Adjacency matrix to show the distance in guideway miles between a row station and the

column stations to which it is directly connected These matrices can be downloaded in CSV format and run through a Matlab script for Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm to determine the Guideway Distances between each row station and column station and compare those distances to the line-of-sight distances In the future further Matlab scripts can be developed to perform additional analysis on this Guideway Distance Matrix

bull Yearly Statistics Page The Yearly Statistics Page analyzes a custom network file by computing the number of stations interchanges shape points and guideway miles built per year This functionality can be improved in the future by including the number of trips served by each yearrsquos network These yearly statistics calculations should probably be combined into the same script that performs network analysis from the main PRT Tool page

33 Network Overview Enhancements

bull StationTripsphp Update When a network designer clicks ldquoCompute Trip Informationrdquo on the PRT homepage network statistics are written to the NetworkStats table on kornhauser-devprincetonedu Known issue Hudson and Warren counties have such large KML files that they do not reliably write to the database Future Improvements When a designer clicks ldquoCompute Trip Informationrdquo overall statistics and individual station statistics are displayed in a pop-up window However stations are NOT identified unless named Station ID numbers should be displayed to help the designer figure out which stations are contributingdetracting from the network Additionally if the Station NameID could be hyperlinked such that the Google Earth plugin snaps to the station of interest

bull Network Statistics Overview The Network Statistics Overview Page displays overall trip data for each county PHP and SQL are used to read from the NetworkStats table and write to an HTML page Statistics by county include station count guideway miles total trips served possible trips served percent of possible trips served actual home trips served possible home trips served actual work trips served possible work trips served actual education trip served possible education trips served actual transportation trips served possible transportation trips served actual recreation trip served possible recreation trips served actual patron trips served possible patron trips served and date network was last modified Known Issues 1) Because Hudson and Warren are not properly writing to the database their statistics are not displayed 2) The SQL query currently selects county data by MAX entryid but the entryid is only pulled

from the first day of edit As a stopgap solution previous entries were removed from the database

bull Real-time Double Count Elimination Nathan implemented client side ldquoquery circlerdquo cropping to provide a more accurate representation of trips served in the frac14 mile radius circle in the Google Earth module Number of stations within a frac12 mile radius and their coordinates are passed via GET variables $c and $m respectively in the PRT5b-xxhtml Future steps check station of interest against nearby stations Only include trips served if station of interest is closest

bull Network Financial Statistics Overview The financial report that the network designers manually created included number of trips price per trip station naming rightsadvertising revenue cost of building network maintenance costs and operating costs This process could be streamlined by creating an input page that processes PampL server side displays desired metrics in a pop-up and writes to a FinancialStatistics table similar to the interaction between StationTripsphp and NetworkStatsphp

4 Atlantic County

41 Atlantic County and its PRT Needs Atlantic county is located in southern New Jersey and has an area of approximately 671 square miles of which 561 square miles is land There are just over 103000 households5 with a total population around 270000 people While Atlantic County has a population density of 450 people per square mile6 the majority of the people reside in the Atlantic City-Hammonton metropolitan statistical area the US Census estimates that close to 40000 people live in Atlantic City7

Since Atlantic City is the most well-known attraction and densely populated region in the county the PRT networkrsquos priority is to provide high quality service in Atlantic City An estimated 37 million people visit Atlantic City annually and its 13 casino hotels which have over 12000 guest rooms enjoy occupancy rates in the 90s year round8 However while visitors can easily access the boardwalk from the Atlantic City International Airport about 23 of the visitors to the city travel by car the other third by coach bus and only 2 of the tourists arriving by air 9

This statistic reveals the commutersrsquo needs for and demands of PRT in Atlantic City 13 of the visitors to Atlantic City do not have a car and must rely on public transportation taxis bike or foot to travel around the city

Even though there is a shuttle that runs in Atlantic City and services the major attractions PRT would give them a cheaper and more convenient way to see the city while still being able to reach their destinations quickly Because of the high number of people who could potentially use the PRT to attract the highest number of customers possible the network needs to minimize the distance traveled and hence travel time to go from one attraction to the next Furthermore there needs to be a sufficient number of stations so that all the attractions can be reached As a result as one can see below the network for Atlantic City appears more congested than the rest of the county since there are more and quicker route options Ideally the ease with which one can reach several tourist attractions will make increase revenue to the city which can help fund the building of the network

5 httpwwwaclinkorgculturalaffairsfastfacts 6 httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434001html 7US Census Estimate httpfactfindercensusgovservletSAFFPopulation_event=ChangeGeoContextampgeo_id=16000US3402080amp_geoContext=01000US|04000US34|16000US3400100amp_street=amp_county=atlantic+cityamp_cityTown=atlantic+cityamp_state=amp_zip=amp_lang=enamp_sse=onampActiveGeoDiv=geoSelectamp_useEV=amppctxt=fphamppgsl=010amp_submenuId=population_0ampds_name=nullamp_ci_nbr=nullampqr_name=nullampreg=nullnullamp_keyword=amp_industry= 8 httpwwwatmeorgpubsarchives77_255_1119cfm 9 ibid

Figure 11 Transportation in Atlantic County

NJ Transit currently has the regional rail the Atlantic City Line which connects Philadelphia and Atlantic County making stops in Hammonton Egg Harbor Absecon and Atlantic City In Feb 2009 NJ Transit also started operations for the Atlantic City Express Service line which connects Atlantic City with Newark and New York Penn Station This three stop line only runs on Friday Saturday and Sunday10 The majority of the visitors to Atlantic City are regional hailing from New Jersey New York or Pennsylvania11

so the creation of the PRT network could change the method of travel to Atlantic Csity from car to rail by eliminating the need for a car To further reduce the number of visitors who drive to Atlantic City the municipal government should consider increasing parking costs to NYC levels

In order to capture the New Jersey market the PRT system needs to be connected to neighboring counties Those closest to Atlantic City are least likely to travel to the city by bus and are also probably the most frequent visitors to Atlantic City It should also be noted that connecting Atlantic County and Cape May County should be a priority because of Atlantic Cape Community College which focuses on educating residents of both the counties of Atlantic and Cape May

10 httpwwwacestraincom 11 httpwwwatmeorgpubsarchives77_255_1119cfm

42 PRT Network Creation Process

43 Data Collection Step 0 of the PRT process is to gather data on the number of commuters which entails the number of visitors to businesses students enrolled at each school and people living in each census block We used the data for the county from the previous yearrsquos class so this step mainly required eliminating repeat entries making sure that the locations of major placemarks such as high schools were accurate and editing the visitor estimates to be more realistic ie removing estimates of 16 146 400 visitors at the local newspaper The final estimates used reflects some news updates discovered during this editing process such as that the Atlantic City Surf minor league baseball team ceased operations in 200912 and the Sweetwater Casino burned down in the summer of 200813 and the opening of Cedar Creek High School in 201014

For the enrollment numbers the number of students was obtained from the schoolrsquos website and the number of employees was estimated using the state of New Jerseyrsquos student-teacher ratio of 139 and adding on 30 people for principals custodians librarians the lunch lady etc Visitors to a school was estimated by assuming that 1 of the student body would have a visitor (such as parent dropping off something homework left at home) and adding 5 for non-student related visits such as deliveries The number of visitors to an office or manufacturing type of business was typically estimated to be at most 200 people per day and often much less and the number of patients estimated per day for a private practice to be around 50-60 people a day after assuming that 2-3 people were seeing patients every 20 to 30 minutes for seven hours a day The Convention Center patron total was estimated to be 7000 per day as a compromise between the extremes of the Convention Centerrsquos predictions of general public attendance (sometimes over 40000) and exclusive conferences (600)15 An unreliable internet source said that a manager said that Walmart could receive up to 4000 shoppers in a day This number was used as a cap for most attractions and all stores because like Walmartrsquos everyday low prices nothing beats Walmart16

The casinos are probably by far the largest attraction in Atlantic City and accurate estimates for daily patrons are difficult Estimates for annual total visitors are around 37 million which is approximately 100000 people a day Most major casinos and attractions (attractions were estimated to be as popular as a major casino at best) were estimated to have 8 to 15 thousand visitors a day to account This estimate comes from the fact that several of the major casino hotels have roughly 1500 rooms (some have more than 2000) Assuming that each hotel has a

12 httpwwwnjcomnewsindexssf200903atlantic_city_surf_minor_leaguhtml 13 httpabclocalgocomwpvistorysection=newslocalampid=6236543 14 httpenwikipediaorgwikiCedar_Creek_High_School 15 httpwwwatlanticcitynjcomvisitconventioncalendaraspx 16 Upon later review when it was too late to change all my estimates a more reliable source puts the Walmart daily visitor count as ranging between 200 and 2200 httpinsightkelloggnorthwesterneduindexphpKelloggarticlewal_mart_supercenter_versus_the_traditional_supermarket

100 occupancy rate which is not far off from the actual rate which is in the 90s year-round17

we get 3000 people a day who are staying in the hotel not including the day-trip only people (assumed to be at least twice as many) and people who go to the resort to enjoy the various other activities there such as the spa shops nightclubs and restaurants Estimates for the visitors to the boardwalk were relatively low since most of the major casinos are next to the boardwalk and so there would be overlap that would inflate the patron trip count If the total number of patron trips should be approximately 4 times the population these estimates are fairly close to the 370000 person count at 155 million

The patron trip totals did not differentiate between shopping dining and entertainment Estimates for the categories were based on the following assumptions 65 of the patron trips were for shopping such as clothes groceries medical (buying medical services) etc 25 of the trips were for dining only 10 of the patron trips were for entertainment since estimates of casino visitors were reflected in recreation which was included in entertainment So to clarify entertainment consisted of recreation and 10 of general patron trips

17 httpwwwatmeorgpubsarchives77_255_1119cfm

44 Network Design Process The next step required building the actual network by placing the stations at logical and profitable locations and connecting them with interchanges Restrictions taken into account were that stations could only have one arc in and one arc out and interchanges could have at most 4 arcs in or out total There was also emphasis on minimizing the amount of two-way guideway because of the significant increase in cost Stations were placed to minimize coverage overlap overlap occurred most frequently in the more suburban and rural areas due to reduced location options Stations were connected with several ldquomain linesrdquo that rarely if ever changed direction and then interchanges were placed in the middle of stations as much as possible These restrictions and technique led to a network similar to the Manhattan subway system with one-way guideway and every other parallel guideway going in the opposite direction This forces riders to pay an ldquoaround the blockrdquo penalty where they would potentially have to loop around the block to reach a destination that they could have reached if it were a two-way street Below is a picture of the Absecon region that demonstrates this technique and shows the coverage of each station

Figure 12

Any station that was outside of the main lines that run north-south through the county typically required a loop To minimize the around the block penalty when beneficial because of the one-way nature of the guideways these loops were designed to go in the opposite direction of the main line A simple example of this loop can be seen with the Egg Harbor Train Station shown below If we take the upper-left hand corner to be north then the main line runs north-south

This design meant that when the loop was reconnected with the main guideway the commuter enters the main system further up the line and thus has more options and a smaller around the block penalty In this example the backward loop allows for commuters from the train station to access the station circled in blue and cross to the other side without having to go down and back around

Figure 13

This design was especially important as we move further away from downtown Atlantic City and towards the suburbs where many of the streets do not have a checkerboard design that minimizes the around the block penalty By minimizing the penalty more stations have direct access to a larger loop As seen below the circled stations do not have to loop around and instead can go directly to the loop from the main line

Figure 14 The Full-Service PRT System 14

With these considerations in mind we get the full-service PRT System shown below This 450 mile network has 350 stations and 445 interchanges While it only serves just under 54 (5880 of 10986) of the placemarks this system serves 905 of the trips

The blue lines highlight the guideway headed towards Atlantic City with the guideway in the middle going ldquouprdquo headed away from Atlantic city There are two lines headed towards Atlantic City to allow the residents of Atlantic County go to Atlantic City at any time of the day There is no need to go only when the trains allow for it because as the saying for PRT in Atlantic County goes all lines go to Atlantic City

Figure 15

In creating this network one principle that I tried to go by was to make sure that every school was connected because not only do we always have to keep the children in mind but children have to go to school and itrsquos the most guaranteed destination in a region This principle became an issue when the school districtrsquos neighborhoods were spread out with low population densities When the school in question was an elementary or preschool the decision to not provide PRT was easy because no parent would send their preschooler off to school by themselves and only elementary school children of a certain age may be allowed to go to school by themselves An instance of this occurring is circled in blue Small schools were also neglected if they were remote with a small enrollment because they tended to be private schools and itrsquos unlikely that they would fire their driver and ride the PRT to school anyways

While there are few stations along the three main tracks of guideway and only one main purpose of connecting the northwest part to the southeast part of the county one justification for having it is that it could be what the 6th Avenue elevated railroad line was to NYC Before the construction of the 6th Avenue line there was little developed there but after it became

connected the property value went up and the area flourished18

By having the guideway there it would be easy to build stations in the future to increase service if necessary If it doesnrsquot then the system just provides better service to the customers

18 ORF 467 Evolution of Transportation Technology lecture notes

45 The NJ Transit-PRT System Profitability is a function of the demand and the location of a station Even if there is enough demand to make building a station profitable it makes little sense to have a PRT station if it is remote and requires miles of guideway to connect to the rest of the network As one can see in the full-service PRT network in which stations were placed for maximum service ie in the densest areas we can say that Atlantic Countyrsquos population is clustered in two chunks If we consider the Hammonton Train Station as representing a mini-network then based off our definition of profitability this mini network creates an enormous fixed cost by having to connect it to the main network

This multimodal system has 330 stations 433 interchanges and is connected by 419 miles of guideway to serve 89 of the trips and 5769 of 10987 placemarks

Figure 16

We get the NJ Transit-PRT System by removing eliminating the guideway that connects the two networks By making this reduction we cut the amount of guideway needed by about 30 miles19

19 Calculations made with full-service system and original NJ Transit-PRT system that did not include changes to patron estimates or additional placemarks

and at $5 million a mile we save 150 million dollars without even considering maintenance costs By eliminating this guideway we do reduce service by eliminating the

stations along the removed guideway but we are still able to serve almost 90 of the trips with this network This multi-modal network uses NJ Transit to connect the people of inland Atlantic County to the Atlantic City half of the network Based on the assumption that people attend their local school and donrsquot travel across the county for most of their activities this design allows the residents of the mini network to use the PRT to do their shopping go out to eat at a restaurant visit friends and go to school While the residents of Hammonton and Buena (lower half of mini-network) can only reach the other network by train or car to address the inconvenience of disjointed networks two possible solutions are park and ride lots on the border of the Atlantic City side of the network and increased NJ Transit service from Hammonton to Egg Harbor The other assumptions made for this system is that those on vacation going to Atlantic City from New Jersey donrsquot value their time as much as those on business so they wonrsquot mind waiting a short time to catch the train For those traveling for business the belief is that they can plan their meetings accordingly around the train schedule drive to a park and ride lot skip the train and catch the PRT or allot more time for business

451 NJ Transit-Recession Model

In light of the recession there is also the NJ Transit-Recession System in which service to Buena is cut (circled in blue) The NJ Transit-Recession is 386 miles long with 316 stations and 416 interchanges This multi-modal transportation network serves 5634 of the 10 987 placemarks which accounts for 880 of the trips While the percentage of trips served does not decrease significantly I do not like this model because a network in Buena would allow the residents to commute to work go to school and go shopping

Figure 17 Recession Model

Of the three PRT networks mentioned I believe that the most viable option is the NJ Transit-PRT system This system minimizes costs by reducing excess guideway without sacrificing satisfactory service to the commuters by utilizing the transportation system that is already in place

Keys to success for the PRT in Atlantic County

Construction for the PRT will start from Atlantic City and move inlands as the years progress because it has the greatest and most dense demand in the county In constructing the network I noticed that it was relatively easy to service 75 of the county because many of the major trip attractions are clustered together only approximately 220 stations were needed However once the dense areas were served and the focus shifted to the more spread out areas of the county it became exponentially harder to increase the proportion of trips served with a similar increase in the number of stations For example it took approximately 280 stations to serve 80 of the trips and 326 for 83 and 404 for 85 of trips served20

Of the NJ Transit model the mini-network (Hammonton and Buena) will be lowest in priority Eventually once the system is sustainable we can consider expanding to the full-service model

I made my network before the year feature was added so below is a picture with circled priority areas The Atlantic City network should be built first (circled in purple) followed by the Pleasantville area (circled in blue) Richard Stockton College of New JerseyAbsecon (green) Egg Harbor (yellow) Mays LandingAtlantic Cape Community College (orange) and Absegami High SchoolGalloway (red) After Atlantic City which has the greatest demand in the county these priorities were based on NJ Transitrsquos bus weekday ridership data which shows that most of the people who ride the bus particularly lines 502 507 508 and 509 have a final destination of Atlantic City (typically at least 23 of the riders) a large portion of these riders board the bus from the Pleasantville Egg Harbor and Absecon regions21

20 This number is greater than the final network of all designs because it was tracked before a missed major attraction was served and a number of other revisions were made after the initial network was completed However this does not change the point that past a threshold that is probably close to 75 it becomes exponentially harder to see an increase in trips served that corresponds to a similar proportional increase in stations We can see this fact from the other direction as well because in my revisions I was able to remove several stations while only decreasing the percentage of trips by 2-3 21 2009 Bus Zone Profile Weekdayspdf

Figure 18

Each PRT network design only serves just over 50 of the placemarks so to increase ridership there needs to be park and ride lots throughout the county Many of the smaller neighborhoods are out of walking distance from a station but are still close enough to where it would not be inconvenient to access the PRT with a two minute drive to a nearby station Furthermore park and ride lots are crucial to the success of the PRT because while many of the stations are technically frac14 mile away the walking path distance is usually greater than one would like to walk not to mention that the frigid cold in the winter The idea of the park and ride stations is that each major station could be like Princeton Junction where the daily commuters catch the NJ Transit to NYC to go to work

One of the main sources of competition for the PRT network in Atlantic City will be the jitney operated by the Atlantic City Jitney Association This shuttle has four different lines three of which run 247365 Each trip costs $225 but trips to the terminal station are free Not only will the PRT provide quicker service with more freedom but to address this competition the Atlantic City PRT will have promotions and packages such as individual and group day passes There will also be lockers at each station that will be have unlimited use for free with the purchase of a pass or at a very low cost for one-time travelers These lockers are meant to overcome one of the main inconveniences of being car-less not having a free storage place for everything not needed at the moment The lockers will free people finish their errands or enjoy their entertainment without the annoyance of lugging around a bag of clothes or groceries

One suggestion for next year is to try and get a bus map such as this one incorporated into Google Earth as a toggle feature It could be useful in helping plan out routes or seeing which important neighborhoods are being overlooked If not possible using a bus map in conjunction

with NJ Transitrsquos ridership data could be useful in finding important places to provide service for

46 Cost Analysis of NJ Transit-PRT Network

NJ Transit-PRT Network 330 Stations

419 miles

433 interchanges

Table 11 Network Statistics18

Total Trip ends served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips Fleet size

Average trip Length (miles)

Average Vehicle Occupancy (tripsvehicle)

Vehicle Operating Costs

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Table 12 Capital Costs

Item Cost per Total Total Capital Cost (in millions)

Station $2m 330 stations $660

Mile of guideway $5m 419 miles $2096

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

Table 13 Annual Recurring Costs (M)

Cost of Capital Maintenance Operating Total

$573 $143 $401 $1117

Table 14 Annual Revenue (All values in millions except for fare)

Fare ($) Fare revenue ($) Station lease and naming rights ($) Total ($)

Annual Profit (loss)($)

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

$225 is NY Metro fare

$137 is minimum fare to barely break even

Standardized plot of profit (in millions) vs the fare

Figure 19 Standardized plot of profit (in millions) vs the fare

Trip Ends Statistics (Per Day)

Table 15 Trip Ends Statistics (Per Day)

Home School Work Shopping Transit Entertainment Dining Total

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

Possible (Non-Student) Patrons trips in your county 155219622

Total Trip (Ends) Served 2741092 3081756 (8895 service)

Figure 110 Trip ends served per station

22 Patrons split into 65 shopping 25 dining 10 entertainment (in addition to recreation)

Figure 111 The 25 busiest stations

Figure 112 After removing the 25 busiest stations

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Bergen is the most populous county in New Jersey boasting a population of 895250 With 234 square miles of inhabitable land Bergen County has an average population density of 3826 people per square mile It is part of the New York Metropolitan area and thus the transportation system serves as a vital system for people commuting to New York Population is densest towards the lower portion of Bergen Bounty as shown below in Figure 21 From httpwwwcity-datacomcountyBergen_County-NJhtml we can see that Bergen County has a population that is rather evenly distributed in terms of age and sex with a slight tendency towards younger age However its workforce is mainly office workers due to its proximity to NY There are approximately 22000 students attending school and 14000 students attending college The average income of tax payers was $90000

Figure 21

Interestingly enough 73 of the people in Bergen County currently use private vehicles with no carpooling to commute to work and only 17 use public transportation For more information on public systems see httporfeprincetonedu~alainkPapersORF20467F08PRTSystempdf Bergen County

has a wide diversity of various attractions and points of interest ranging from schools to offices to heavy commercial areas

52 Initial Network We decided to place the initial networks in the two areas of denser population Namely the lower left and lower right of the county Since the practicality of a system is important to its use we focused on creating enough stations in the local area to be usable

The tracks usually followed existing roads and sometimes went over forests and water One route conveniently leads to the densely populated region of Passaic County Roads were not followed 100 of the time because the PRT seeks to create close locations not linked by roads closer in terms of travel time Thus it is convenient to have it transverse over water and forests

Figure 22

53 Construction Evolution In the second stage we will try to add networks and link the two bottom networks in

the west and east This will also cover the paths leading to the airport and Giants stadium increasing revenue significantly Thus stage three will consist of saturating the bottom half of the county as well as extending the top half The fourth state will complete the process and expand the networks to profitable positions in the top half of the county In addition it is important to note that due to the block system used as saturation increases efficiency also increases as interconnectivity increases within the network since the cost of extending a connection between two blocks is subsidized by the building of a station on that connection

Figure 23 Stage two coverage area

Figure 24 Stage three coverage area

54 Final Network

Figure 25 Final Network

Note pictures do not contain guide ways and shape points due to network issues leading to loss of data

The final network spans the entire county and covers 80 of the trips in the county In

total there are 612 stations 607 interchanges and 52604 miles of track However the miles of track should be closer to 600 miles of track because of the lack of shape points in the second model With a $3 fare this network is expected to make $2 billion net profit a year However this number is grossly inflated as the original Bergen County data was inflated The total number of trip ends has been reduced by about 10 million from last year This network produces a higher profit than last yearrsquos due to higher efficiency The tools this year allowed for the users to see the coverage area and achieve a more efficient coverage of the county

Below are some assumptions we took in determining our ridership and profit We assumed that peak hour trips are 15 of total trips In addition the fleet size was 11 of peak hour trips These assumptions are however rather generous considering land prices in Bergen County Table 21

Networks Statistics County Bergen

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips Peak hour

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

In addition it is to be noted that due to the low population density in the northern region the city-gird-like design of the network could not be implemented Instead a series of vertical parallel lines were used to reach isolated populous networks in the north The parallel paths were connected with each other and the isolated networks in the northern region were also linked However the minimal path between stations there is still relatively far compared to the air-distance

Below is a distribution of trip ends served by stations for the final network

Figure 26 Distribution of trip ends served by stations

Note this information was not provided for initial and developing networks as due to a technical error the network data was lost In addition pictures of the network with interchanges and links were also not available due to the same reason

There are a few values that are exceptionally high in terms of station trip ends served because multiple stations could not be inserted due to unavailability of space However as one can see it is still rather acceptable as the average station density is 21000 trip ends per day In addition only a few stations contribute to the high average Perhaps it is possible to make those selected stations larger

Figure 27 Density distribution of trips from largest to smallest

Figure 28 Cumulative Density distribution of trips from largest to smallest

55 Coverage Analysis Below is a table of the various types of trips and the networkrsquos service coverage of those

trips As seen the coverage is fairly decent for all trips except for home trips This is mainly due to the low density of residential areas This makes it cost inefficient to set stations and cover those areas

Table 22 Trip Ends Served

home school work shop transp

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

County Total Trip Ends

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Trips served (per day) 4153256

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

56 Financial Analysis As shown below our break-even price was $130 fare This is mainly due to the high population density in Bergen County Realistically the break-even fare would be around $170 because the current model lacks shape points Thus the guide ways would be longer

Figure 29 Graph of projected fares and profits

The most costly elements in the capital costs are the vehicles If we assumed that the network was constructed all at once it would require at a 3 interest rate it would require less than 6 years to pay off (See spreadsheet page 2 for calculation) Table 23 Basics costsRevenues

Basic Costs Revenue County Bergen

Capital Costs Annual Recurring Costs Annual Revenue PampL

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenance Operating Total Fare

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

57 Conclusion Bergen County is one of the more profitable counties in NJ As seen also in previous years it has always been the most profitable county The concentration of density in the southern region of the county allows for a favorable design of network that maximizes efficiency In addition since Bergen County is one of the most populous and riches counties there is a lot of profit to be made The large number of white collar workers provides a large workforce and a large number of commutes per day This project has allowed me to not only learn more about network design but also has allowed me to realize the importance of the PRT system It was an enjoyable experience

Notes After getting the county file corrupted twice I hope that future classes will back up their data in custom files as well as in the main station file In addition Bergen Countyrsquos data is still not very accurate I hope that future classes will alter some patron trips to entertainment and recheck the school numbers

6 Burlington County

61 Geography and Demographics Burlington County spans central New Jersey and extends from south

east Pennsylvania to Atlantic shoreline Data from the US Census Bureau estimate the total area of the county to be around 819 square miles making it the largest of New Jersey counties in terms of area Counties adjacent to Burlington include Mercer Monmouth Ocean Atlantic Camden Philadelphia and Bucks

As of 2009 the current population of Burlington is estimated to be around 446108 Of the population 58 are under 5 years old 229 are under 18 years of age and 136 are over the age of 65 The 2008 census estimated the average number of people per household as 27 with a median household income to be around $76869

Current Transit Services

Over 80 of the population is currently reliant on automobiles for transportation According to census data of 2000 the average time to get to work was 282 minutes Three US Routes pass through Burlington and include route 9 130 and Route 206 Public transportation needs of the county are dealt with by Burlington County Transport Services which provides pre-arranged shuttle transportation named Paratransit buses which are mainly used by the elderly and disabled Other transportation services the county receives include a light rail transit system that goes from Trenton to Camden while stopping at intermediate stations along the Delaware river front Buses and trains stop in the center of Burlington City Further information on the countyrsquos transportation can be found in the ORF467F04 report

62 Initial Networks

Figure 31 Initial Network Total Stations 64 Total Interchanges 43 Total guideway length 9749 km (6058 mi)

The locations of the initial three networks were chosen for their potential profitability and relative placement within the county The criteria for the initial network location include the size of population in the area the amount of work trips served and the amount of potential recreation attractions serviced The same criteria were also applied to the immediate areas around the initial network as expansion would be made easier in those types of areas The three locations of the initial networks form a triangle that form part of the edges of the final network and cover a large portion of where the final network would be

63 Northern Network

Figure 32 Northern Net Total Stations 20 Total Interchanges 16 Total guideway length 3956 km (2458 mi)

This network is centered in a high population density suburban area Along the straight slanted streets at the outer edge of the area featured many of the retail and restaurant

business that received steady patronage from the families in the neighborhood A network here seems likely to draw in regular customers who need to run errands around the neighborhood seek light recreation on various days or works in any of the numerous shops and business in the area In the south east portion of the network connects the shopping mall to the rest of the suburbs giving families easy access to one of the biggest attractions in the area The odd shape of the roads through the neighborhoods made route planning difficult and somewhat inefficient but when the network expands it would become easier to reach some stations

Southern Network

Figure 33 Southern Net Total Stations 24 Total Interchanges 13 Total guideway length 3251 km (2021 mi)

The south eastern network also extends to both densely populated suburban homes as well as a bustling commercial district The south eastern wall of the network serves both recreation and occupation trip attractions Using the routes and highways around the neighborhood made finding direct paths to points of interest easier and overall made this network more manageable This network made use of a roundabout at the center of the polygon to help facilitate traffic passing through the center region while also reducing the travel time when passengers try to reach the opposite side of the network The location of this network has great potential for expansion as commercial district extends southeast from it while more homes exist both north and east of its location

64 Eastern Network

Figure 34 Eastern Net Total Stations22 Total Interchanges14 Total guideway length 2542 km (1579 mi)

The third initial network is located the farthest east and is centered in an isolated neighborhood with access to commercial areas The distance between suburban areas and retail spots was greater in this area and required longer railways to service all of the trip ends Similar to the Southern network this network also features a square block of interchanges that take in rail cars a lets them out in several directions along the roads of the neighborhood With its proximity to the other northern network its expansion to the west is a priority for the future

65 Profitability Table 31 Trip Ends Network Stats and CostsRevenues

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Stations Interchanges

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips Peak hour Trips Fleet sizeAverage

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)64 43 6058 798808 39940 5991 659 5 2 100$ 020$

Stations Guideway Vehicles Total Cost of Capital Maintenance Operating Total Fare

Station lease and

naming Total(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

TotalTrip ends served by station Burlington County

Capital Costs Annual Recurring Costs Annual Revenue

County Total Trip

Trips served (per day)

Networks Statistics Burlington County

Basic Costs Revenue Burlington County

Even while located in areas with high levels of population and attractions the initial network has a relative high cost compared to expected revenue At a fare of $300 annual revenue doesnrsquot cover operating and maintenance expenses and instead loses $19 million dollars annually In order for the initial networks to break even they would have to charge at least $456 to avoid incurring debt Depending on the level of expenses associated with other forms of transportation a person may be willing to regularly use the network for transportation

More than likely the fare would need to be kept low to attract more customers and the network could endure an initial cost The hope would be that once the full network is complete the initial losses could be covered by the profits

Figure 35 Profit vs Fare

66 Expansion and Development

Figure 36

In order to increase the effectiveness of the networks and generate a greater revenue the initial networks would need to be expanded to include more residential zones and other attractions in the county If each of them extended their networks in a direction along the triangle that they form then they would ultimately form a connected network that covered the majority of the densely populated areas of the county The stages of development are listed above and account for a wider expansion of the network as well as greater coverage internally within the network The length of each stage could vary in length depending on how popular PRT system becomes As attractions and residences are reached the rate of expansion can increase as coverage of attraction increases revenue and more trip ends are served By the fourth stage the initial networks could be fully connected with connections leaving isolated points of interest to be connected to the network in the fifth stage of development

Stage Stations Interchanges Guideways (mi)1 71 41 632 190 174 131443 298 286 299634 392 388 409165 542 513 59535

Table 32 Network Evolution

The Final Network

Figure 37

Once the final network is completed the network forms a perimeter around the more rural parts of the county and connects the densely populated areas in the west with the more isolated towns in the eastern parts of the county The total number of stations is 542 with 513 interchanges that connect the railways together and making reaching far off stations faster and more efficient Its total guide way length sums up to 95813 km (59535 miles) Aside from the perimeter the network is also connected through the center where rural suburbs bridge the gap between the two sides of the network

Figure 38

The densely covered region in the west is made up of a web of PRT rail ways that follow along the roads and paths already established in the area To avoid having rail ways being too invasive railways were put along major roads and around neighbor blocks As a larger portion of the population resides within the region more stations were established here than in any other regions in the county For efficiency a higher number interchanges were used to ensure that destinations can be reached in a series of short segments from any location In many of the more densely populated areas round-abouts on and off ramps two-way rail lines were used to help traffic flow

Figure 39

Rivers were present at some points in the time and railways were restricted to pre-established bridges Attention was given the direction of the path on the bridge to ensure a balance of traffic flow across the river Often time interchanges were positioned at the two ends around the bridge in order to allow rail cars to reach a wide range of stations from the bridge and allow traffic to quickly disperse after crossing the bridge If possible when actually constructing the network many more bridges could installed to help facilitate traffic flow

Figure 310

As the population decreases as you go away from the urban centers in the county the number of stations also rapidly decreases Many of the railways merge as the number of stations decrease but overall the same ratio of interchanges and stations are maintained to maintain the same level of efficiency in travel In many of the regions in the east the network serves more as a train than a PRT and many idle stations are connected by one-way rails and are more effectively used to bring people in rural areas to attractions in the more urban areas of the county

Figure 311

Between the densely populate regions in the west and the sparsely inhabited areas in the east it became essential to connect the networks across regions with relatively lower

populations The shortest path between networks was found and new railways were added to connect them If putting a station along the path could satisfy enough attractions then a station was added along the path Traffic balance was a concern so multiple paths were used to ensure that a flow of traffic was maintained in both directions

The minimum amount of trip ends served was 96 and the amount of service increases exponentially up to 61260 Many of the largest values of trip ends served are representative of stations on the border of densely populated area and large shopping centers The actual values of trip ends served may be skewed by the data as many values approximated in the data for the total number of visitors at a business was sometimes 10 times the number of employees or students which may be unlikely The data is further skewed in that census data gives populations and employment based on blocks so as many as 30 businesses could be located at a single point on the map In the program this would result in all of their trip ends satisfied by one station when in reality many of the business may be more than a quarter of mile from the station While some data values may still need to be adjusted to get a more realistic sense of the number of visitors per business it is clear from the data that some areas are in need of multiple stations in the same area to satisfy all trip ends at certain spots Stations with more than 40000 trip ends served should be turned into two stations with over lapping coverage

The smallest of the trips ends served coordinates with stations along the transitions between the initial networks especially along the eastern side of the network These areas were mostly rural and had little productions or attractions The trip ends served may also be different than the reality if you consider the railways acting as a train stop People more than a quarter of a mile might use a station to reach other parts of the county

67 Station types Education and Housing stations

Many of the location of public schools in the county were located within the residential neighborhoods which gave stations in those areas a high degree of service All of the universities were serviced and connected to large attractions to the areas around them to give college students an incentive to use the network to go off campus As Burlington is dominated by suburban neighborhoods much of the railways had to pass through along major roads through neighborhoods in order to be accessible

Recreation and Recreation stations

Recreation place marks were not distinguished from employment stations however special attention was given to try and cover demand for major recreation spots Outside of malls and retail shopping the biggest recreation attractions are its six public golf courses and several nature parks Many of these destinations had some of the largest attraction values in the data series and were included in the network to service their higher level of attraction Interchanges were placed strategically around these spots to increase the capacity of traffic to and from these destinations

Employment Stations

All of the stations used for recreation also served as stations for employees of the same facilities Large office buildings and other areas with a high number of employees were easily identified in the county as they were usually surrounded by infrastructure and dense residential areas These stations were usually connected to residential zones to allow for the employees to use the network for their daily commute As the census data recorded employment based on blocks often times dozens of businesses were satisfied with one station when in reality they may be father than a

quarter of a mile from the station

68 Financial Analysis home school work shopping transportation entertainmentetc dinning Total1005548 64334 613272 - - 2662846 - 4346000

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip ends

served Toal Trips Peak hour Trips Fleet size Average trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and naming

rights Total(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

TotalCounty Total Trip

Basic Costs Revenue Burlington CountyAnnual RevenueAnnual Recurring CostsCapital Costs

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

At the standard rate of $300 per rider the network gains over $400 million dollars annually At that fare the networkrsquos capital costs could be paid within 15 years and any initial losses could be paid of in the years afterward The breakeven point of the full network is just over $200 which is far more affordable for the average traveler than the initial $450 minimum fare The profitability of the full network far exceeds the initial networks values Compared to the initial networks the rate of profit growth per dollar in fare is much steeper and due to the greater number of passengers being served by the network This would mean that fares would have to be adjusted relatively little in order to see significant changes in profits The overall coverage of trip ends in the network is around 62 and could easily grow as the network continues to gain greater revenue The remaining trip ends are spread out over the rural areas where trips served by a station would not make it profitable to serve so few passengers

69 Conclusion The network would have a pretty hard time getting past its installation cost and

receiving enough profit to expand from initial networks while still keeping prices low enough to invite passengers As the network grows so do the trip ends covered and the distance that travelers can go As the overall appeal of the network to travelers improves the network slowly begins to gain a greater profitability The profitability of the network greatly increases as coverage increases and with it the minimum fare falls making the rail transportation a much more reasonable alternative to driving With the fully connected network the PRT can rival the train stations in the county with its ability to reach deep within neighborhoods and commercial centers to get people close to their chosen destinations The network serves a dual purpose in the county as both a train station to connect isolated neighborhoods as well as local transportation to popular destinations With the rising price of gas and parking a stable $300 fare to meet transportation needs could easily gain favor by the public once the network got expansive As the network grows the break even fare decreases so it may only be a matter of time before fares could drop to more affordable levels Over the course of a few decades the network could gain enough coverage and extend far enough for people to forgo other means of transportation all together except as a means to get to the nearest PRT station

7 Camden County

71 Background As one of the densest counties in New Jersey Camden presents a unique opportunity to

create an efficient financially successful PRT ndash Personal Rapid Transit ndash System With a population of 508932 (last calculated in the 2000 US Census) and a total area of 228 square miles its population density is about 2290 persons per square mile Clearly the density throughout the county differs from area to area but the densest regions of the county are located on the Western side bordering the Delaware River As one moves more inland the county becomes somewhat sparser especially in areas such as Cherry Hill and Lindenwoldi

Understanding the countyrsquos current transportation systems is an important step to understanding the potential for PRT in the county The main public transportation systems that exist in Camden are The River Line which serves trips along the city Camden to Trenton (Figure 41) the Atlantic City Rail Terminal which serves trips along Cherry Hill to Atlantic City (Figure 42) and the PATCO Speedline which serves trips along Lindenwold to Philadelphia (Figure 43)

Figure 41 The River Line

Figure 42 The Atlantic City Rail Terminal ndash Purple Lineii

Figure 43 PATCO Speedlineiii

Given these current transportation networks the PRT system must be carefully designed to enhance these systems not diminish them I believe PRT would complement each of these lines ndash helping people not only arrive at the above stations (from nearly anywhere in the county) but also reach areas that are not covered by the current rail networks

72 My PRT System In setting out to design my PRT system the ultimate goal was the profitability of the network as PRT represents a private enterprise In order to make PRT a viable system I aimed to serve 90 of all trips throughout the county

Step 1 The first step in the system design was station placement After uploading my countyrsquos trip data I laid out all my PRT stations in Camden County Because I wanted a profitable system only stations with over 3000 trips within 025 miles of the station were built

Figure 44 Initial Station Placemarks

Figure 45 More Station Placemarks

Figure 46 All stations in Camden County prior to network connection

Figure 47 Station Coverage

Step 2 After putting down my stations I began deciding how I would connect them My strategy was to first lay out a grid connecting interchanges to stations and interchanges to interchanges for high efficiency

Figure 48 Stations alternated with interchanges

Step 3 After alternating each of my stations with an interchange I connected them in a grid as shown below

Figure 49 Initial Grid Connection

Figure 410 More line connection

In some cases in my county the stations were sparse and this initial line connection was not as simple

Figure 411 South Camden PRT Initial Line Connection

Step 4 After this initial network creation I morphed my grid to fit along the roads and terrain of Camden County This step clearly lowered the efficiency of my network but of course itrsquos crucial to the process In this step the station placemarks remained in their original location but the interchanges and guideway lines were altered to fit the shape of the terrain and roads

Figure 412 Morphed Grid Connections

Figure 413 A section of the final network in Camden County

Figure 414 Another piece of the network

This summarizes the process I used to build my network Below I will discuss the initial networks that planned for my county as well as address some overall network statistics

73 Initial Networks in Camden

The first initial network that I decided to build in Camden County is located in Camden city New Jersey I chose this location because its high population density ndash with 79904 people the density in Camden is about 9057 persons per square mile Additionally this city possesses a high level of diversity in land use and there is already a readily available travel demand to Philadelphia and Trenton due to the available PATCO and River Line railways

I chose Pennsauken as the location for my second small network I chose this location because of its high population density (35737 people total ndash 3392 people per square mile) and diversity in land use This location shows large commercial trip generation areas as well as neighboring residential areas In addition the area possesses a nearby River Line station serving trips along the Delaware River to Trenton

For the third initial network in my county I chose Lindenwold due again to high population density (17414 people total ndash 4415 people per square mile) Additionally this area possesses high levels of commercial and residential zones The PATCO Lindenwold Station (with service to Philadelphia) draws about 4800 entries on average every weekdayiv

Screen shots of my initial networks are shown below

Heavy traffic in these areas are crucial to the initial networkrsquos success

Figure 415 Camden Initial Network

Figure 416 Pennsauken Initial Network

Figure 417 Lindenwold Initial Network

74 Network Profitability and Statistics

8 Cape May County

81 Introduction Cape May County is located at the southernmost tip of New Jersey It is surrounded on by the

Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean to the southwest south and east Its population as of

2009 was 96392 though in summer months that number can swell up to nearly 8 times that

size as its main industry is tourism Cape May is 620 square miles 255 of which is land It is

bordered by Atlantic County to the north and Cumberland County to the northwest Most of its

population is found on the coastal areas such as Ocean City Avalon Stone Harbor the

Woodbine area and the Cape May area Being at the south of New Jersey Cape Mayrsquos winters

are milder than other counties and it also has milder summers compared to most other places

in New Jersey

For previous yearsrsquo reports click here here (p 41) here (p 49) and here (p 43)

For a brief history of Cape May click here

For facts and figures about Cape May click here

82 Initial Network The initial network is located in the boroughs of Avalon and Stone Harbor They are populated

enough that it makes sense to build a network there and they both have ranked on the Forbes

list of most expensive zip codes in the United States so they would have the money needed to

start up a network in the county Avalon and Stone Harbor are also tourist areas in the

summer known for their nice beaches

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Figure 51 Initial Network

83 Final Network The final network covers Ocean City Avalon Stone Harbor Woodbine Cape May the suburbs

of Ocean City and Lower Township Other areas of the county did not make it into the final

network because of their relatively low number of possible trips

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 51 Network Statistics

Table 52 Costs

6784 of all possible trips in Cape May County were covered by this network An average

vehicle occupancy of 3 was assumed because most people go to the beach in groups so there

would be relatively less one-passenger trips A fare of $300 per ride leads to an annual loss of

$43 million To break even the fare would have to be raised to $400 per ride

The stations with the most trips per day were mainly located on the coast near attractions such

as popular restaurants and shops amusement parks and other recreational areas There were

70 stations on the network that serviced less than 1000 trips a day meaning they were at a

loss Ideally these would be removed from the network to increase profit however they still

add to the coverage of the county which is already quite low

This fare vs profit graph has a very gradual slope because of the low number of stations and

the low coverage rate

84 Construction Plan Evolution Ocean City

After the initial network in AvalonStone Harbor the next phase would be Ocean City Ocean

City is the largest city in the county with a population of 15378 according to the 2000 census

The summer population can be as much as 130000 The Ocean City beach is so popular that

you need to purchase a beach tag to gain access during the summer months

Wildwood Area

This network covers Wildwood Crest Wildwood and North Wildwood It has a summer

population of over 250000 and has very nice beaches as well Wildwood also contains Moreys

Piers amusement complex and the Raging Waters and Ocean Oasis water parks which attract

thousands of visitors a day during the summer season This network is just south of the

AvalonStone Harbor network so they would be connected

After Wildwood

There are two areas at the southern tip of the county in Cape May that are tourist hot spots

Small networks would be built there after Wildwood Later a network in Sea Isle City would be

built It beaches attract many tourists plus having a network there would connect the Ocean

City and AvalonStone Harbor networks The suburbs of Ocean City and Lower Township would

be added last as they donrsquot have as many tourists but are still quite densely populated

85 Summer Statistics Since at the moment the network is losing money the possibility of only running the system

during the summer was examined All school trips were eliminated and transit trips were

multiplied by 3 and recreational and PT trips were multiplied by 4 A real summer network

would probably involve removing all non-tourist areas from the network which would probably

result in more profit but these just some rough figures

With a fare of $300 the network would generate $13 million a year The break even price is

9 Cumberland County Cumberland County is located near the Delaware Bay and is approximately 2 hours away from New York City and 45 minutes or so away from Philadelphia and Atlantic City It was founded in 1748 and has total area of 677 square miles with 489 square miles of land According to the 2007 estimates from the census bureau over 155000 (146438 from the 2000 census) people reside in the three cities ten townships and one borough of Cumberland County Cumberland was named after Prince William the Duke of Cumberland and is adjacent to Gloucester County Atlantic County Cape May County Kent County and Salem County

91 Demographics The population density of Cumberland according to the 2000 census was 299 people per square mile with an average density of 108 housing units per square mile This means that the county is one of the larger counties in the state with one of the lowest populations Most of the inhabitants reside within one of the three cities (Bridgeton Vineland and Millville) Table 61 Age Breakdown

Age Breakdown

Demographic Total of Residents of Population

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Figure 61 Population Density Map (from 2000 Census Data)

Municipalities of Cumberland County Table 62 Summary of Cumberland (Data as of April 1st 2000)

Cumberland County

Number Municipality Population Square MI

1 Vineland City 56271 687

2 Millville City 26847 424

3 Bridgeton City 22771 62

4 Shiloh Borough 534 12

5 Stow Creek Township 1429 184

6 Greenwich Township 847 182

7 Hopewell Township 4434 299

8 Upper Deerfield Township 7556 311

9 Deerfield Township 2927 168

10 Fairfield Township 6283 523

11 Lawrence Township 2721 375

12 Downe Township 1631 508

13 Commercial Township 5259 325

14 Maurice River Township 6928 934

Economy Summary

According to the 2000 census data Cumberland has a per capita income of $17376 and a median household income level of $39170 whereas the state of New Jersey had a per capita income level of $27006 and a median household income level of $7034723

The majority of the residents of Cumberland are involved in the farming industry although in the three cities of the county residents are employed in other areas ranging from mining manufacturing and construction industries to business services education and health services as well as the hospitality industry

suggesting that Cumberland is perhaps one of the poorer counties in New Jersey

Education Summary

There are 37 elementary schools in the county 7 high schools and according to information from the Cumberland County Public School System there were over 26000 students enrolled in 2004 In the county there is one institution of higher education and that is the Cumberland County Community College in Vineland with totally enrollment of approximately 3000 students (all commuters no student residents)

Transportation Summary

Transportation information is very important for the PRT building process According to the 2000 census the mean travel time in the county was 231 minutes Highways that provide easy access to Cumberland County are the New Jersey Turnpike the Garden State Parkway Route 55 Route 322 and I-295 With the completion of Route 55 (a 40 mile length of highway that took over 20 years to build) the county has seen commerce develop as well as expansions in business and leisure Route 55 allowed for the reduction of the drive between Cumberland and Philadelphia and also feeds into 295 and is according to the countyrsquos website ldquoCumberlandrsquos gateway to the worldrdquo

23 httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates34000html

Cumberland has an airport in Millville and is one of the sites of major employment for the city of Millville as it employs between 1300 and 1400 people and helps to generate over $30 million in payroll annually Cumberland also has bus systems that are run by NJ Transit

92 PRT Network in Cumberland In Cumberland the final PRT Network is as follows

Figure 62 Final PRT network

In this image you can see that there is a large cluster of stations in the Eastern portion of the county which is where the majority of the population resides and also in the middle of the county toward the western border There are areas between the two larger groups of residents that also have stations which helps to join the two networks together There are individual stations around the rest of the county especially in the southeast corner of the county and in the mid to northwest areas of the county

For our networks we used a grid system whenever possible and otherwise we just built loops We used smaller loops so that the trip around the network would not take as long and so that the commuters would be able to save time wherever we could but in certain scenarios where there are only isolated pockets of people living we had a longer track in place so that they could also be connected to the PRT network For Cumberland we were able to achieve a coverage rate of 8613 through 291 stations and 182 interchanges with a total of 39706 miles of guideway The original goal of 90 coverage was rather difficult to achieve because there just arenrsquot enough residents in Cumberland for it to be profitable that way but we did manage to end up with a coverage of 8574

Network for the East part of Cumberland

The above image shows the grid formation of the network in the east of Cumberland County The grid formation reduces the need for two way guide ways and thus is much more cost efficient

Year Built

For our PRT network we decided to build the entire thing over 8 years We chose 8 years instead of 20 because we felt that 20 was too long a time horizon to look at We felt that 8 years was long enough that we could develop the network slowly without having to space it over such a long time span

Below is a table that indicates how many interchanges shape points and stations were built during each year for Years 1 through 8

Table 63 Evolution

93 PRT Summary Below are the summary statistics for Cumberland County

Table 64 Costs and Revenues

The trip ends served per station is graphed in decreasing order

From this we can see that if we charge a fare of $3 we can expect a PampL of about $6 million dollars In order to build the PRT network there is a total fixed cost of $3280 million dollars

We want to look at the areas where the trip ends served for certain areas because we just used the trip data from last year and so wersquod suggest being more judicious with regard to the filtering of data

In addition to this fixed cost there is also an annual recurring cost of $393 million dollars However with the fare set to $3 per ride and the station lease and naming rights we should be able to make an actual profit from this network

The following is a graph of how annual PampL would look at different fare costs It can be seen that only from a fare of slightly above $250 would this project actually be worth undertaking Since it has been proven that people are resistant to the idea of raising prices we suggest charging a higher price upfront so that when the costs rise (due to inflation and other factors) they would not be as resistant to paying these higher prices

For the networks we scaled down the recreation trips by a constant factor so that we could get the total number of trips to a reasonable number We also went through the data sets to remove placemarks that had ridiculous numbers of employees or visitors and the ones that were duplicates of previous placemarks However because we had set the stations in place already we were unable to find them and remove them easily In the future we recommend that students strictly filter the data given to them for the county and remove the obvious outliers We also suggest that the students note the concept of the ldquowiggle effectrdquo Because of the way that the PRT site worked the ridership numbers that showed up for some stations was greater than the actual number of trips that would be there (which made it look like building a station in an area was actually profitable) We recommend double checking that

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Figure 71 Maps of Essex County

Essex County is located in northeastern New Jersey and consists of 130 square miles of land Of this area approximately 254 consists of water and the remaining 9746 of land It is adjacent to the five New Jersey counties ndash Union to the south Morris to the west Hudson to the east Passaic to the north and Bergen to the northwest Newark serves as both its county seat and largest city Essex is made up of 22 municipalities given below Since there is likely to be large volumes of intra-municipality travel networks are likely to serve a larger volume of trips if small individual networks cover areas in individual municipalities

Table 71 Municipalities of Essex County

Boroughs Cities Townships

Caldwell East Orange Belleville

Essex Fells Newark Bloomfield

Glen Ridge Cedar Grove

North Caldwell Orange

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

The entire county is generally flat except for portions of the Watchung Mountains in the western portion of the county Essex County also has several parks with its own park department the Essex County Park system

Table 72 Parks of Essex County

Park Name Location in Essex County

Anderson Park Montclair

Becker Park Roseland

Branch Brook Park NewarkBelleville

Brookdale Park MontclairBloomfield

Eagle Rock Reservation West OrangeMontclair

Elmwood Park East OrangeNewark

Glenfield Park MontclairGlen Ridge

Grove Cleveland Park Caldwell

Hilltop Reservation CaldwellCedar GroveNorth CaldwellVerona

Irvington Park Irvington

Kiprsquos Castle Park Verona

Mills Reservation Cedar GroveMontclair

Orange Park Orange

Oval Park East Orange

South Mountain Reservation West OrangeSouth OrangeMillburnMaplewood

Valisburg Park Newark

Verona Park Verona

Watsessing Park BloomfieldEast Orange

Weequahic Park Newark

West Essex Park West CaldwellRoseland

Westside Park Newark

Yanticaw Park Nutley

102 Demographic Information

As of the 2000 US Census it has a total population of 793633 a population density of 6285 people per square mile Specifically there are 283736 households with each one consisting of approximately 272 people on average The median age is 35 years 490 of the Essex population is male and the remaining 510 are females In the state of New Jersey it is the county with the second largest population density Basic data regarding Essexrsquos demographic breakdown is given below while a more comprehensive summary can be found in the appendix of this report

Table 73 Age Breakdown of Essex County

Population Percentage of Total Population

Persons under 5 years old 58952 74

Persons 5-18 years old 141006 177

Person 18-65 years old 503479 632

Persons 65 years old and over 93207 117

Total population (est 2009) 793633 1000

The history of population growth will help project construction of PRT network In the recent decades Essex County has actually seen a decrease in population The population growth for Essex County NJ is as follows

Table 74 5 2000 US Census Population Breakdown for Essex County

Year Population Change

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

The estimated growth from 2000-2009 for Essex County is quite less than that of the entire state of New Jersey being 37

By examining the population growth of each specific municipality of Essex County we can determine which areas of Essex County in which more immediate and extensive PRT networks would be the most profitable and efficient Both current and future population growth estimates must be taken into account in order to effectively size a new public transportation system such as PRT to an evolving demand capacity

Table 75 2000 US Census Population Growth for Municipalities of Essex County

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Such data will help determine in which areas more extensive PRT networks are most likely appropriate While most of Essex County has been showing a decline in population areas such as Roseland Newark Cedar Grove and Livingston have shown a positive growth in population Fairfield has specifically shown a population growth of 91 within the past 10 years In declining areas we must be aware that an over-extensive development could lead to massive losses in the future We need to consider economic sustainability in the long-term not only the present

Table 76 2000 US Census Population Breakdown for Municipalities of Essex County

Municipality Population Density (per square mile)

Newark 278154 20528

East Orange 65390 17776

Irvington 56299 14904

Bloomfield 43885 13301

West Orange 42561 10744

Belleville 33831 8962

Orange 31058 8123

Livingston 27990 6396

Montclair 26966 6207

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Maplewood 21985 5593

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

South Orange 15882 3708

Verona 12937 3023

Cedar Grove 12698 2464

West Caldwell 10441 2224

Fairfield 7707 2106

Glen Ridge 7271 1973

North Caldwell 7092 1534

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex Fells 2107 676

Furthermore the financial viability and ultimate success of a county-wide PRT network seems to be more achievable if it is to grow from smaller networks established in densely populated areas where there is a larger market to penetrate (greater demand for public transport a greater number of productions and attractions generated) and thus larger initial growth potential for the project

The population can also be categorized by Essex residentsrsquo level of education given in the table below

Table 77 Population Breakdown by Educational Attainment and School Enrollment Comparison with NJ and US Overall Levels

Essex County NJ US

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Population Percentage

Population 25 and older 513570 667

Population Percentage Percentage Percentage

High school graduates (includes equivalency) 139578 272 294 286

Some college or associates degree 107421 209 229 274

Bachelors degree 84953 165 188 155

Masters professional or doctorate degree 56214 109 110 89

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Population 3 years and over enrolled in school 221424

Preschool and kindergarten 30405 137 137 119

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

PRT would need to cater to the school trips generated by the local population The distribution of schools in the county and the ridership demand that students enrolled and teachers employed alike should be a crucial consideration in designing the PRT network Following are the 10 schools in the county with the highest student enrollment

Table 78 High Schools Middle Schools with the 10 Top Levels of Enrollment

School Staff Student Enrollment

West Orange High 198 2000

Montclair High 193 1951

Bloomfield High 183 1846

Columbia Sr High 181 1843

Barringer High 174 1763

East Orange Campus 152 1691

Livingston Sr High 158 1656

Irvingston High School 139 1546

West Side High 131 1487

Belleville Sr High 135 1466

Table 79 Institutions of higher education

School Location

Bloomfield College Bloomfield NJ

Caldwell College Caldwell NJ

Essex County College Newark NJ

Montclair State University Montclair NJ

New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark NJ

Rutgers University ndash Newark Newark NJ

Seton Hall University South Orange NJ

University of Medicine and Dentistry Newark NJ

104 Industry

It would also be beneficial to place stations near these employers which carry the most combined number of employees and patrons daily in Essex County

Table 710 Employers with the 10 Largest Number of Employees

Employer Location

Prudential Financial Newark NJ

Verizon Newark NJ

Public Service Electric amp Gas Company Newark NJ

Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey

Newark NJ

Continental Airlines Newark NJ

MBNA Marketing Systems Newark NJ

McCarter amp English Law Firm Newark NJ

Sills Cummis Epstein amp Gross Newark NJ

Rutgers University Newark NJ

Gateway Security Newark NJ

105 Current Transportation

Essex County currently holds the Newark Light Rail The Newark City Subway section of the rail is 53 miles long and runs between Newark Penn Station in Newark and Grove Street in Bloomfield The second segment is the Broad Street Segment It is one mile long and connects Newark Penn Station to Broad Street Station This segment has stops at Washington Park Riverfront Stadium and the New Jersey Performing Arts Center The entire light rail takes about 21599 daily boardings

5 NJ Transit lines run through the county (NEC Raritan Morristown Line Gladstone Branch and Montclair-Boonton Line)

PATH and NEC Amtrak lines run through Newark Penn Station Our PRT networks will complement these systems providing direct access to each station

106 PROPOSING A PRT SYSTEM In placing stations and interchanges conjunctively while we wanted to place stations in areas of high demand we also wanted stations to be placed amongst each other to form a grid-like structure Ideally each piece of the grid would form a rectangle Interchanges are placed at the four points of the rectangle with one (or sometimes two) station along each side Parallel sides of each rectangle go in opposite directions and each side of a rectangle is also a side of an adjacent rectangle Such an idea is seen through the example of Figure 215

Through such a layout it makes it fairly easy to get from any two arbitrary stations The grid layout makes it so that you can travel in any of the four major directions by crossing at most two interchanges The largest ldquounnecessary circlerdquo that one would need to travel to get between two stations would be the rectangle of each individual grid For the most part we tried to stay on usual roads as building atop current infrastructure would provide both a steady foundation and save on construction costs This would also help complement many modes of transportation

Figure 73 Grid System in Essex County

For the densest areas such as Irvington East Orange and Newark the ldquorectangular gridsrdquo were smaller A quarter-mile radius of some points in these areas served up to more than 100000 trips In such areas 1-3 stations could be found within a quarter mile radius of another

Figure 74 PRT Network Placement and Coverage in a Densely Populated Area

In many of the less dense suburb areas of Essex such as Fairfield Essex Fells etc the population density is drastically less than that of the other municipalities of the region being less than 2000 people per square mile In these areas the same grid-like pattern is also followed as in the dense cities but each rectangular grid is longer in perimeter Usually one station was enough to cover a quarter-mile radius if not more The suburb area also has less of a current grid-like street system but instead features more cul-de-sac and meandering streets To fulfill the grid-like structure of PRT in this area more shape points were necessary In times our PRT network does go through non-roads and ldquonaturerdquo

Essex County NJ is also home to Newark International Airport According to the Airport International Council Newark Airport had over 35360848 passengers in 2009 (Passengers is equal to arriving + departing + direct transit passengers) This meant on average 90000 passengers per day

In reaching the airport one first must converge to the station-interchange of the Newark Liberty train station From there the network mimics the AirTrain station of EWR but instead provides two stops at each terminal

Figure 75 PRT Network at Newark Airport

Newark NJ also features the Prudential Center a multi-purpose indoor arena It can hold over 16000 patrons for events such as ice hockey basketball soccer lacrosse and concerts Its current tenants include the Devils Nets the Liberty the Seton Hall Pirates NJIT basketball the Titans and Ironmen In major areas such as the Prudential Center where the number of daily patrons is exceedingly high we placed two stations directly at the location one at each side of the center During major venues there will definitely be ldquorush hoursrdquo immediately before and after events Thus more than one station will be necessary to fulfill the extremely high demand at specific times

Figure 76 PRT at the Prudential Center

The final PRT network is shown below

Figure 77 Aerial View of the Entire Network and Placemarks (Productions and Attractions)

107 Trip Analysis Statistics The final Essex County PRT Network consists of 707 stations 620 interchanges and 46225 miles of guideway Of the 16251 placemarks recorded in the countyrsquos csv file 15025 of them are assigned to stations and thus are located within a quarter mile radius to at least one PRT station This translates into 9246 functional coverage of Essex County by the PRT network and service to 9414 of all trips generated that are currently served by automobile andor bus transit systems

Table 712 Network Trip Service Rates

Trip Type Potential Number of Daily Trips Number of Trips Served by Network Daily Percentage of Trips Served Daily

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Recreation Trips 55200 52700 9547

Transportation Trips 52800 51665 9785

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

(Non-Student) Patron Trips 1371753 1298681 9467

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Figure 78 Network Trip End Service Rates

The maximum number of trips served by a single station per day is 37018 and the minimum number of trips is 510 trips To estimate the total number of PRT vehicles required to adequately service trip demand given average vehicle ridership is approximately 3 and that the network services at most 10 of all trip demand during its busiest times this can be calculated by dividing the total number of trips per day served by the network then multiplying this value by 010 This yields an upper bound estimate for the number of trips that must be serviced at any one time during the day which translates into an estimated vehicle demand of 156947 vehicles

Figure 79 Trip Ends Served by Each Station Per Day

Figure 710 21 Trips Served by Each Station Per Day

108 Growth in Phases

Phase I Year 0 to Year 5

bull Construct the PRTsystem in the most dense areas (the southeastern area of Essex) that will thus generate the most trips per square mile (and build strong initial revenue) With more people using the system the lower the cost per trip is Create the system in areas such as Newark (city and airport) Orange East Orange and Irvington Begin with basic intra-municipal networks to allow patrons to easily travel within their respective cities

bull Immediately eliminate the light rail and replace it with PRT

Phase II Year 5 to Year 10

bull Begin linking regions that were mapped in Phase I bull Construct the PRT system in medium-dense areas that surround Newark Orange Irvington These include Belleville Bloomfield

Nutley Maplewood South Orange Glen Ridge and Montclair Build them so they grow off of those mapped from Phase I This is beneficial to workers who work in the cities but donrsquot live in them

Figure 711 22 Phase I Development

Figure 712 Phase II Development

Phase III Year 10 to Year 15

bull Continue westward in the county Begin mapping West Orange Essex Fells the Caldwells Cedar Grove and Verona Build stations so they grow off of networks mapped from Phase II

Phase IV Year 15 to Year 20

bull Finish PRT network in the final least-dense suburbs in West Essex County These include Fairfield Roseland Livingston and Millburn Build stations so they grow off of networks mapped from Phase III

bull Begin considering inter-county connections Especially between Hudson and Union and their connection with Newark and the airport

Figure 713 Phase III Development

Figure 714 Phase IV Development

109 Financial Analysis

For the entire PRT system of Essex County we incur the following costs

Table 713 Fixed Costs of Essex PRT System

Component Unit Cost ($ mn) Number of Units Required Total Cost ($ mn)

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

Interchange $000 62000 $000

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

In order to finance this large project we propose that the combined efforts of Essex Countyrsquos municipalities float 20-year zero-coupon revenue (municipal) bonds worth of the entire projected cost ($1941995 million) that are to be repaid directly using earnings from the PRT network In order to determine appropriate unit PRT ride pricing an estimate for the total number of trips per year must be generated From the productions and attractions computed by the csv datasets it was determined that Essex County generates a potential of 4708417 trips per average weekday Given the PRT network design that functionally covers only 9484 of Essexrsquos total area the system is expected to serve an average of 4491285 trips per day This value can be used as an estimate for the number of trips served by the system each of the 260 weekdays that there are per year on average

From our analysis of NJ Transitrsquos 2009 ridership data we can estimate that the number of trips generated and served by the PRT network will be about 4557 of average weekday ridership on Saturdays and about 3010 of average weekday ridership on Sundays Using this assumption we can deduce the following equation

The gradual growth and development of the PRT system must be taken into account before any financial calculations can be made The following table shows a detailed schedule of costs associated with the evolution of Essexrsquos network

Table 714 Schedule of Essex County PRT Projected Fixed Costs

Stations Miles of Guideway Interchanges PRT Vehicles Total Cost No of Trips Served

Unit Cost ($ millions) $200 $500 $000 $010 (Average Weekday)

PHASE I YEAR 5 2409335 Trips Served Per Day

Total No Operational 290 15025 240 80311

Total No Constructed Since previous Period 290 15025 240 80311

Total Cost of Operational Units $58000 $75125 $000 $803112 $936237

Cost of Construction Since Previous Period $58000 $75125 $000 $803112 $936237

PHASE II YEAR 10 3201295 Trips Served Per Day

PHASE III YEAR 15 3735133 Trips Served Per Day

PHASE IV YEAR 20 4491285 Trips Served Per Day

Figure 715 Projected Fixed Cost Schedule

Table 715 Essex County PRT Projected Trip Statistics and Costs

Since the PRT system will only begin to be operational and serve trips beginning year 5 in effect the NJ PRT authorities would only have 15 years (between years 5 and 20) to recover the total cost to pay out the $1941995 million worth of municipal bonds used to finance the project by their maturity date in year 20

Though it must be noted that these calculations do not take into consideration the additional variable costs of maintenance and repairs the proposed idea is supported by a feasible finance plan and offers competitively low rates for an efficient mode of transportation with high accessibility

Assuming this trip unit price an average resident of Essex County traveling 4 times a day would spend $536 per day on transportation and an estimate of $195640 per year In comparison the median cost of a new car is currently at $25500 which translates into an average annual cost of $318750 given that the average life time of a new car is about 8 years according to MSNBC still excluding the complementary costs of fuel taxation insurance maintenance and repairs As an additional point of comparison the cost of a one-way trip on a NJ Transit bus is on average $175 statewide This considered the proposed PRT network offers extremely competitive pricing and is accessible to a wider range of socio-economic classes

By Year 5 By Year 10 By Year 15 By Year 20

Cost of Construction Since Last Period ($ mn) $936237 $361363 $263565 $308460

Trips Served per Day 2409335 3201295 3735133 4491285

Trips Served per Year 722142149 959513746 1119519275 1346158256

Cost of Ticket to Break Even ($) - $359 $186 $134

In order to determine the profitability of the system annual recurring costs and the schedule of revenue (accounting for both ticketing revenue initially saved towards project finance repayment and other revenue from such sources as advertising station naming rights etc) must be taken into consideration Based on the same guidelines and rationale stipulated for Union County the following values were obtained

Annual Recurring Costs

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

Because of the gradual development of the PRT system annual non-project finance earnings will be as follows

Phase I 0 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $000

Phase II 290 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $1740000000

Phase III 452 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $2712000000

Phase IV 605 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $3630000000

Long Term (707 stations x $5000month x 12 months) + ($134trip x 1346158256 tripsyear) = $149627091688

Thus the profitability of the project over time can be summarized by the following table and chart

Projected Profitability

Phase Year(s) Annual Recurring Costs ($) Annual Non-Project Finance Earnings ($) PnL

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Long Term 20 onwards 2330394000 149627091688 $147296697688

Figure 716 Projected Break Even Chart

Projected PnL

As seen from this analysis while the PRT system will make a loss until year 20 when the municipal bonds used to finance the initial construction of the project are paid out thereafter it will be extremely profitable Thus it will be easy to recover such losses within a reasonable time frame It can be concluded that the proposed project is not only financially viable but also a promising opportunity

11 Gloucester County Gloucester County was covers a total land area of approximately 337 square miles and according to the 2000 census has a total population of 254673 residents It is located to the south of Philadelphia (approximately 69 miles away) and northwest of Atlantic City Originally Gloucester County used to encompass the present Atlantic and Camden counties It is an agricultural industrial and residential area with farming being the main source of income for the county Gloucester is adjacent to Salem County Cumberland County as well as Camden County and several other counties in New Jersey and Pennsylvania There are a total of 22 counties boroughs and cities in Gloucester

111 Demographics According to the 2000 census there were a total of 254673 residents and 90717 households giving a population density of 785 people per square mile for Gloucester County with an average of 277 persons per household The age breakdown of the county is as follows Table 81 Age Breakdown

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Figure 81 Population Density Map (Census Data from 2000)

Table 82 Municipalities of Gloucester and estimated population (as of 2000)

Gloucester County

Number Municipality Population Square

1 Newfield Borough 1616 17

2 Clayton Borough 7139 74

3 Glassboro Borough 19068 92

4 Pitman Borough 9331 23

5 Wenonah Borough 2317 10

6 Woodbury Heights 2988 12

7 Woodbury City 10307 21

8 Westville Borough 4501 14

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

10 Paulsboro Borough 6160 26

11 Swedesboro Borough 2055 08

12 Logan Township 6032 268

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

16 Woolwich Township 3032 212

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

18 Harrison Township 8788 192

19 Mantua Township 14217 159

20 Deptford Township 30529 176

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

22 Monroe Township 28967 469

23 Franklin Township 16853 564

24 Elk Township 3949 197

We can see that the majority of the population of Gloucester lives in the larger townships and boroughs such as Monroe Washington Deptford Franklin West Deptford and Glassboro

Economy Summary

According to the 2000 census data24

The top 5 large companies in Gloucester are listed in the following table

the median income for a household in the county was $72316 and the median income for a family in the county was $85532 which means that the county has a per capita income of $30893 and approximately 620 of the population of the county below the poverty line

Education Summary

According to the education data on Gloucester County there are a total of 171 schools in the county including 82 public elementary schools 39 private elementary schools 16 public high schools 30 private high schools 2 colleges and universities and 2 businessvocational schools

24 httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434015lkhtml

According to the US Census bureau 77861 are enrolled in the school system in Gloucester County25

In Gloucester County 93 of people use private transportation Over 18 of the residents work outside of the state Interstate 295 is the only interstate in the county and passes through the Northwest portion of the county as does the New Jersey Turnpike26

There are sever state routes which pass through the county such as Route 41 42 45 47 55 77 324 and others There are no connections to NJ Transit train systems but there is a bus route that is not very well developed

25 httpfactfindercensusgovservletSTTable_bm=yamp-geo_id=05000US34015amp-qr_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_S1401amp-ds_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_amp-redoLog=false 26 httpenwikipediaorgwikiGloucester_County_New_Jerseycite_note-GR2-6

112 PRT Network We can see that the majority of the population of Gloucester lives in the larger townships and boroughs such as Monroe Washington Deptford Franklin West Deptford and Glassboro These were the municipalities that we had the most PRT stations in Although the original goal was to have 90 coverage in the county such that the citizens would be able to have a PRT station within a quarter mile radius in the smaller municipalities where there wasnrsquot as much population this was not feasible We managed to end up with a coverage of 8114 service in the county

For our PRT network we had grids on the east and west sides of the county because the population was essentially split that way There were many more residents on the two sides than in the center of the county and this can be seen through the placement of the PRT stations We placed stations where there was an indication from the site that therersquod be a profit and in a few (rare) cases we placed stations where the numbers were really close to the cutoff threshold for profitability (1000)

Figure 82 Gloucester County Final PRT Network

Gloucester County Northern Tip PRT Network

There is a grid network set up here and also in the Northeast We did so because the grid setup is the shortest way for users of the network to get to where they need to go

Northeast PRT Network

Year Built

For the Gloucester County PRT network we decided to shorten the building time to 6 years instead of 20 because we felt that we would be able to realize more immediate profits if we finished building sooner The following is a table indicating how many stations interchanges shape points will be built and guideway miles will be laid in the 6 year time period for this project Table 83 Evolution

113 PRT Summary Below are the summary statistics for Gloucester County for the PRT network Table 84 Network Statistics

This is a graph of the trip ends served per station arranged in decreasing order

From the above chart we can see that with a fare of $3 we can expect to make a profit of $122 million dollars In order to build the network however we would have to pay a fixed cost of $4438 million dollars or 44 billion dollars This is because there is a large number of stations (434) and interchanges (210) and there is a total guideway length of 472 miles These stations and interchanges allow for the PRT network to cover 8114 of the county

The following is a graph of how annual PampL would look with different fare costs It can be seen that once the cost of a ride exceeds $250 it because profitable to build the PRT network in the county We recommend charging a bit more initially because due to the way people view increases in price they will be very averse to price increases (which will be necessary later due to inflation and other costs increasing)

Notes for future classes

Now that wersquove finished with the networks for the counties that we worked on we have a few notes wersquod like to make about the networks First off wersquod like to point out that the data really needs to be scrubbed down There are many duplicate placemarks in the csv files that we were given and also placemarks that had completely unreasonable numbers for employees and visitors causing there to be stations with huge ridership numbers What we did to remedy this was that we went through and deleted duplicate placemarks and also rescaled the number of recreation trips by a constant factor so that wersquod end up with a total number of trips that seemed reasonable Something else that we noticed was that therersquos a problem with the PRT page in that the numbers will only update if you wriggle the mouse around a bit so that caused us to place some stations in areas that were not particularly profitable but the way that the site works makes it really difficult to find and delete these stations

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Figure 91 Maps of Hudson County

Hudson County is located in northeastern New Jersey and consists of 62 square miles of land Of this area approximately 2521 consists of water and the remaining 7479 of land It is adjacent to the counties of Essex Union and Bergen in New Jersey and to the counties of Richmond New York and Kings in New York Jersey City serves as both its county sea Hudson is made up of 12 municipalities shown below

Table 91 Municipalities of Hudson County

Boroughs Cities Towns Townships

East Newark Bayonne West New York North Bergen

Jersey City Guttenburg Weehawken

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

According to the 2000 US Census it has a total population of 608975 and a population density of 13044 people per square mile making Hudson County the densest county in New Jersey and the sixty-most densely populated county in the United States Such density provides a great market for a PRT system Specifically there are 240618 households with each one consisting of approximately 260 people on average The median age is 34 years Basic data regarding Unionrsquos demographic breakdown is given below while a more comprehensive summary can be found in the appendix of this report

Table 92 US 2000 Census Population Breakdown for Hudson County

Under the age of 18 137628 226

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

Over the age of 65 95609 1570

Total Population 608975 10000

A summary of growth statistics is given below

Table 93 US Census Population Breakdown in Hudson County

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth statistics for each individual city will help in generating the phase plan for constructing the network over a long-term period of time The recent growth statistics for the following municipalities since the year 2000 is shown below

Table 94 US Census Population Growth for Hudson County from 1990 - 2000

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Figure 92 Hudson County Percentage Population Change in Each Municipality from 1990 - 2000

Both Hoboken and Harrison have shown substantial growth in the recent years This continued growth provides promise in providing PRT in these areas as demand for the network will hopefully continue to grow as the PRT goes through its 20-year construction phase

Table 95 2000 US Census Population Breakdown for Hudson County

Education

The population can also be categorized by Hudson residentsrsquo level of education specified in the table below

Table 96 8 Population Breakdown by Educational Attainment and School Enrollment Comparison with NJ and US Overall Levels

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Population 3 years and over enrolled in school 157624 258

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

A new PRT system would serve school trips generated by the local population Thus the distribution of schools in the county and the ridership demand dictated by the number of students enrolled and staff employed 3are crucial factors in the designplanning process

Serving as the gateway county into New York City Hudson has an extremely developed multi-modal transportation network First of all it is host to an extensive road system that includes multiple tunnels linking NJ directly to New York City as well as the following major routes

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull County Route 507-508

bull County Route 601602605609

bull County Route 501 505

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull NJ County Route 501

bull Birdge Street Bridge

bull Port Liberte-Grove Street

bull Bergenline Avenue

bull NJ Interstate 78

bull Count Route 644653655657

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull Old Bergen Road

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Figure 93 Map of Major Routes in Hudson County

Hudson is hub to an extensive variety of rail and light railway systems First of all The PATH serves Harrison Journal Square Downtown Jersey City and Hoboken in Hudson County and connects riders directly to various destinations in New York City including the Financial District Midtown (Penn StationHerald Square) and Chelsea the Meatpacking district Ridership volume is vast as it serves the markets of regular NJ-NYC commuting predominantly for work and education purposes

Figure 94 Map of PATH coverage in Jersey City Hoboken and NYC

Hudson County contains the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail which connects the cities of Bayonne Jersey City Hoboken Weehawken Union City and North Bergen The light rail opened in April 2000 and currently has 23 stations With a daily ridership of about 38200 on an average weekday NJ Transit is looking to expand its daily ridership to about 100000 It is looking to expand to the Meadowlands Sports Complex Secaucus Junction Bergen County and Staten Island

Figure 95 Map of Hudson-Bergen Light Rail System

The county is also host to Secaucus Junction Secaucus Junction currently serves access to eight commuter lines ndash Bergen County Main Montclair-Boonton Morristown Meadowlands Rail NEC North Jersey Coast Pascack Valley and Port Jervis ndash with an average weekday ridership of about 4533 (productions the number of passengers boarding at this junction) per day

As another New Jersey-New York City commuter option there are many ferries that regularly traverse the Hudson river Specifically these connect Jersey City Hoboken Weekawken and Bayonne to New York To name a few such ferry systems currently in operation there are the Franklin Street Pavonia Desbrosses Street Spring Street Christopher Street

Weehawken North Weehawken Fort Lee Englewood and Hoboken ferries These ferries also see high ridership volumes which generate both productions and attractions within the county throughout the average day Thus it is imperative that their docking areas and ports be taken into account in the design of a Hudson County PRT system Given rush hour traveler volumes each one will likely merit at least 1 PRT station directly assigned to it

125 PROPOSING A PRT SYSTEM

Figure 96 Final PRT Network for Essex County Map of Placemarks (Productions and Attractions)

126 Trip Analysis Statistics The final Hudson County PRT Network consists of 490 stations 768 interchanges and 28579 miles of guideway Of the 8790 placemarks recorded in the countyrsquos csv files 8415 of them are assigned to stations and thus are located within a quarter mile radius to at least one PRT station This translates into 957 functional coverage of Hudson County by the PRT network and service to 9803 of all trips generated that are currently served by automobile andor bus transit systems

Trip Type Personal Number of Trips (Daily)

Number of Trips Served by Network (Daily)

Percentage of Potential Trips Served

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Student Trips 76428 76062 9952

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Figure 97 Trip Ends Served by Station in Descending Order

Figure 98 Trips Served by Each Station

The maximum number of trips served by a single station per day is 127926 and the minimum number of trips is 589 which is equal to 255852 and 1178 trip ends respectively To estimate the total number of PRT vehicles required to adequately service trip demand given average vehicle ridership is approximately 3 and that the network services at most 10 of all trip demand during its busiest times (peak hours) this can be calculated by dividing the total number of trips per day served by the network then multiplying this value by 010 This yields an upper bound estimate for the number of

trips that must be serviced at any one time during the day which translates into an estimated vehicle demand of 149710 vehicles

The proposed PRT system of Hudson County will incur the following costs

Table 98 Total Fixed Costs Incurred

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

In order to finance this large project we propose that the combined efforts of Hudson Countyrsquos municipalities float 20-year zero-coupon revenue (municipal) bonds worth the entire projected cost ($1737990 million) that are to be repaid directly using the earnings from the PRT network In order to determine appropriate unit PRT ride pricing an estimate for the total number of trips per year must be generated From the productions and attractions computed by the csv datasets it was determined that Hudson couny generates a potential of 4279755 trips per average weekday Given the PRT network design that functionally covers 9803 of Hudsonrsquos total area the system is expected to serve an average of 4215076 trips per day This value can be used as an estimate for the number of trips served by the system each of the 260 weekdays that there are per year on average

From our analysis of NJ Transitrsquos 2009 ridership data we can estimate the number of trips generated and served by the PRT network will be about 4557 of average weekday ridership on Saturdays and about 3010 of average weekday ridership on Sundays Using this assumption we deduce the following equation

r tripsyea0301263371 = psyearsunday tri 66608738 ripsyearsaturday t 532842100ripsyear weekday t7601095919 =

kday tripsweeaverage 07621541003arsundaysye2

kday tripsweeaverage 07621544557yearsaturdays2

kday tripsweeaverage 0762154year weekdays260 =YearPer Trips Average

ridership weekday average of

timestimes

timestimes+

The gradual growth and development of the PRT system must first be taken into account before any financial calculations are made The following table shows a detailed schedule of costs associated with the evolution of Hudsonrsquos network

Table 99 Schedule of Hudson County Projected Capital Costs

Millions $ Stations Miles of Guideway Interchanges PRT Vehicles Total Cost

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

PHASE I YEAR 5 2100210

PHASE II YEAR 10 2980210

PHASE III YEAR 15 3500210

PHASE IV YEAR 20 4215076

Table 910 Hudson County PRT Projected Trip Statistics and Capital Costs

Cost of Construction Since Last Period ($mn) $809770000000 $338828333333 $216853333333 $372543333333

Cost of Ticket to Break Even - $365 $179 $135

To breakeven they must charge $135 per trip Thus an average resident of Hudson traveling 4 times a day would spend $540 per day on transportation and an estimate of $197100 per year This is a very competitive price and as demonstrated in the cases of Union and Essex counties it would be accessible to a wider range of socio-economic classes than current alternative modes of transportation

Figure 99 Projected Capital Cost Schedule

To further assess the proposed Hudson PRT systemrsquos profitability annual recurring costs as well as all sources of revenue must be considered as well as their timing

Table 911 Graduation of Annual Recurring Costs

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

Figure 911 Projected PnL

The proposed PRT system will make a loss in its first 20 years of existence while capital costs are still being repaid However immediately afterwards in year 20 it will begin making substantial profits Clearly it is an endeavor with massive potential for growth and success within the Hudson County community

13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction Hunterdon County was established on March 22 1714 and named after colonial Governor Robert Hunters old world home Hunterston Hunterdon is part of the New York Metropolitan Area and Flemington in Raritan Township has been the county seat since 1785

132 Placemarks Hunterdon County Placemarks had two major problems 1) about 50 of the placemarks in the file were actually placed in Mercer and other neighboring counties and 2) all the businesses had 0 visitors and 0 people working there For the first problem we just estimated the boundary of Hunterdon County and then deleted all the placemarks outside of that imaginary boundary For the issue of 0 visitors and 0 employees we implemented a random number generator with normal distribution of mean ten and standard deviation five to generate all the employees for all the businesses for the visitors we again implemented a random number generator with the same parameters and we multiplied this random number to the number of employees in a business to get the visitors We would suggest that next yearrsquos group completely re-do the placemark file for this county

133 Network Design

Figure 101 Hunterdon Initial PRT Network in Califon

Figure 102 Complete Hunterdon PRT Network

134 Summary Of Network Statistics

Hunterdon PRT Network Statistics Trip Type Home Work School Recreation PT

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Possible 505412 108363 9600 1474 258568 883417 Trip Ends

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

135 Summary Of Financial Statistics Table 103 Financial Statistics

Financial Networks Statistics Hunterdon County

Stations Interchanges Guideway Tot trip

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Avg Vehicle Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op Costs

() (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Basic Costs Revenue Hunterdon County

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Total Cost of Capital

Maintenance

Operating

Total Fare Station Lease

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

136 Summary Of Trip Ends Served

Figure 103

Since we randomly generated the employee and visitors data for businesses certain places with a lot of businesses ended up with a LOT more trip ends served than what is probably realistic The highest trip ends with 40000 trip ends served station is one such example

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

Mercer County is located in central New Jersey The county contains New Jerseyrsquos state capital Trenton and has a population of 364883 according to the US Census Bureau27

Below is a map of the county

Mercer contains a handful of college campuses including Princeton University in Princeton Rider University in Lawrenceville Mercer County Community College in West Windsor and Thomas Edison State College in Trenton

27 US Census Bureau Population Division 28 Image httpwwwreal-estate-maplewood-njcom

Mercer ranks 80th our of over 3000 counties the United States in per capita income according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis29 Some of the larger employers include the universities Bristol-Meyers Squibb Church amp Dwight Company McGraw Hill Companies and Educational Testing Services30

The county has three train stations on the Northeast Corridor Line that runs from Washington DC through New Jersey and New York up to Boston Trenton Transit Center Hamilton Station and Princeton Junction

142 General Strategies and Initial Networks

1421 UrbanmdashTrenton

For urban areas within Mercer such as Trenton my strategy was to build interconnected concentric cycles to create a grid The natural grid network of streets made the network design relatively simple with stations at street crossings and guideway along the roads I think this system worked particularly well in Trenton as the city contains a diverse mix of productions and attractions and in general the concentric cycles allow for direct trips that only incur an additional ldquoaround the blockrdquo cost See below for a picture of the Trenton initial network

29 ldquo250 Highest Per Capita Personal Incomes of the 3111 Counties in the USrdquo 2006 30 Mercer County Economic Profile

Interchanges played a key role in the urban design serving as ways to move between the cycles and provide two-way guideway in some areas The stationsrsquo coverages tend to overlap only because the density of Trenton productions and attractions requires nearly full coverage in order to be effective

1422 SuburbanUniversitymdashPrinceton University

My main strategy in planning the suburban and university networks was to minimize the invasiveness of the system In general schools and neighborhoods pay close attention to atmosphere and PRT guideway all over campus and the surrounding areas would be the last structuring that these places would want in a PRT network However by completely avoiding the suburbs and colleges we neglect an important part of the population and a very high number of trips Thus I attempted to balance the issues of serving trips while minimizing invasiveness in planning out these networks

In order to minimize intrusion I decided to use two-way guideway in a handful of instances I think colleges and neighborhoods would be happier with a few instances of two-way guideway versus lines that run all the way through the campus or surrounding areas See below for a closer look example (from the old Princeton Network)

I chose to create the first initial network at Princeton University and its surrounding areas The University alone has a student population of around 7500 and a staff of around 5000 However the network design is mainly with the staff in mind as college students tend to be frugal and everything on Princetonrsquos campus seems to be an easy walk away The only semblance of PRT currently exists on the campus of West Virginia University in Morgantown WV so another college town seems like an appropriate place to begin See the next page for a snapshot of the Princeton Network

I made a few changes to the initial Princeton Network with the goal of reducing travel time for short line of sight trips across campus On a second consideration these changes would be imperative to the creation of a network in Princeton In my old network I tried to keep campus guideway as close to zero as possible However in doing so there were a few situations where short line of sight trips looked to be a fair amount longer because the guideway went in a loop around campus Thus if adjacent stations were not connected by guideway in the right direction one would have to ride the entire loop to go from one to another By not making these trips convenient (across campus for instance) we neglect a large portion of trips within the University that could provide significant revenue

In this new network I decided to take advantage of the existing on-campus streets Elm and the street south of Dillon Gym to provide the desired accessibility This design would probably not align with the Universityrsquos ideal system but by serving more trips and demonstrating higher profitability of this initial network we can make the push for expansion earlier And with this additional revenue we might be able to make a profit-sharing agreement with the University such that we would be allowed to place some guideway on roads on campus

1423 Rural

I did not design an initial rural network as I mainly used these to interconnect the previous two network designs My basic strategy for rural areas was to make loops with one-way guideway and use two-way guideway only to connect loops or minimize invasiveness For an illustration see the next page

143 General Statistics

Below is a table of the general network statistics The dataset from last year slotted ldquorecreation tripsrdquo under ldquonon-student patron tripsrdquo and for consistency I decided to do the same One area of improvement that can be made to a proposal for PRT in Mercer county would be to split the non-student patron trips into recreation dining shopping etc The main concept that I changed since the earlier report had to do with home trip ends According to the old dataset only 200000 people resided in Mercer County so I took a look at the placemark file and evenly distributed the population throughout the Census blocks to get the number to the 360000 threshold Hopefully the 2010 Census data can be used to get more accurate results The new results are below

Table 111 Total Trip (Ends) Served

Serves Possible Service

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Recreation Trip Ends - - -

Transport Trip Ends 39000 39000 1000

Student trip Ends 111656 113410 985

(Non-Student) Patrons trip Ends 294020 324334 907

Total 2145088 2353841 911

On the next page is a table containing the population statistics for Mercer as well as a population distribution for New Jersey as of the 2000 Census The county has about 364000 people so the 425649 work trips indicates a (total) employment percentage of 464 assuming that each person works away from home and 25 trip ends are at work The breakdown is between male and female

Table 112 New Jersey Population Distribution 2000 Census

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

As it turns out around 48 of the population should be making work trips so the Mercer numbers slightly low-ball actual employment This is with fairly liberal assumptionsmdash everyone from 5-25 makes school trips only and everyone over 65 (retirees) makes no work trips This result makes a lot of sense as the employment data in the placemark file is less than complete For instance I did a search for a handful of popular fast-food chains (McDonaldrsquos Wendyrsquos and Burger King) and not a single one appeared in the file The placemarks are fine for the large employers and census data but if someone could find a way to improve the employment data that would do a great deal in improving the bid for a Mercer PRT system Given the spotty data I think the number of work trips is fairly realistic

The 089 ratio of patrons trip ends per day to the county population seems reasonable as on the average each person might make an non-work non-home outside trip every day or every other day The trip ends per person per day seems slightly on the low side at 645 given that the 0-5 and 75+ populations are assumed to take no trips However once these factors are considered the average person has about 76 trip ends per day which seems reasonable

Table 113 Population Statistics

Population 364883

Possible Trip Ends Per Person Per Day 645

Persons between 5-75 310151

Possible Trip Ends Per 5-75 Person Per Day 759

Patrons Trips Per Day Population 089

The interchanges were assumed to incur no construction cost leading to a close to 11 ratio of interchanges to stations

Total Stations 491

Total Interchanges 456

Total Miles of Guideway 47885

An image of the entire network is included on the following page

1431 Entire Network

144 Further Analysis

Below is a chart of the total trips served by station in Mercer County The chart has a heavy tail as only a pair of stations serve more than 25000 individuals per day By far most stations serve 5000 people or less See below the chart for descriptions of the two most populous stations

Trenton (serves 35106 people per day) ndash This station is located in probably the densest residential and commercial area in Mercer County as it contains Thomas Edison State College (~7000 people counted at three trips each)

Princeton Junction (serves 27609 people per day) ndash NJTransit Data indicate that 9000 boardings (each way so 18000 total) occur at the Princeton Junction Transit Center on a typical weekday and residentialcommercial establishments make up the rest

145 Finances

In terms of financial feasibility the Mercer County Network seems reasonable with the base line assumptions At a fare of $3 average trip length of 5 miles and using a linear mode split discount factor the network makes an annual profit of $178 million after paying the annual operating expenses and cost of capital Because Mercer is a very wealthy county we could also consider a higher fare than the base $3 in which case Mercer would turn even higher profits

With the changes made to the Census population data to hit the correct Mercer County population the profitability swung favorably

Table 115 Networks Statistics

Mercer Networks Statistics

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

Most of these numbers can be tweaked to test what-if scenarios for running a Mercer PRT Network and there is a fare adjustment graph on the following page A PampL analysis is included in the table below After amortizing the capital cost in debt (at an interest of 8) and including the yearly operating costs the system attains a profit of $178 million

One key item to keep in mind is the size of this networkrsquos coverage In the attempt to reach 90 coverage I had to build stations in zones that contained fewer and fewer trips I would guess that there is most likely an optimum profitability level of coverage for profitability between 30 and 80 However most importantly the network does satisfy the overall goal of the NJ PRT system of profitability and 90+ service

Another potential adjustment to the model might be in charging a different fare We assumed $3 for an average trip length of five milesmdashthe chart below depicts yearly profit when varying fares and given completely inelastic demand With the changes made to the population statistics the break-even fare dropped a dollar to about $2ride

Mercer Basic Costs Revenue

Station lease and naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

break even point ~$200

146 Station Cost Analysis

I ran a station revenue analysis looking at how many stations would surpass the break-even point I used the assumption that each station would contribute $045 in revenue per trip served I used 300 as the number of days per year as weekend trips are reduced I also discounted the number of trips by 09 to account for modal split To compute the break-even point I assumed that each station cost $2 million dollars and that we would borrow the money over 20 years at an 8 interest rate Inserting this number into a mortgage amortizing calculator31

gives a regular payment of $203000 per year

As it turns out most stations fall below this break-even point This result does make sense for this network thoughmdashattaining the 90 threshold in Mercer meant building stations that served less than 1000 trip ends at first and then moving on to stations that served even less than 500 trip ends per day The stations in Princeton and Trenton are the ones that are on the left side of the scale and in general the stations become more and more rural as you move rightward This graph affirms the proposal that PRT start in denser trip-heavy areas like Princeton and Trenton and gradually expand outwards

31 httpwwwbretwhisselnetcgi-binamortize

147 Construction Evolution Plan

On the following page is a table indicating the yearly build statistics for the Mercer County PRT Network The plan runs 15 years and starts with initial hubs in Trenton and Princeton University Unfortunately I was not able to run a profit-by-year analysis but I would imagine that the initial years networks (years 1-5) offer the best profit margins as the large trip productions and attractionsmdashuniversities urban areas large corporate offices and dense residential areasmdashare covered

Years 5-10 start to move into the suburbs and school districts While these network additions are most likely profitable they would not be as successful as the previous networks due to less trips and more guideway in general Years 10-15 start to move into the less profitable stations in rural areas where some stations serve less than 1000 trips This is the sacrifice a county or the state would have to make in order to serve 90 of trips and in this case it turns out that the system maintains profitability I would not necessarily recommend immediate expansion beyond the 2nd or 3rd year as the modal split numbers indicate that stations built in years 4-5 and beyond do not break even Though the entire system would be profitable in those years maximizing profit is a great objective and adding unprofitable stations would not make sense Of course a more accurate dataset would aid greatly in this regard We could also consider adjusting the $045 revenue per trip assumption especially for the most populous stations but with this data and these assumptions full expansion does not seem reasonable

Table 117 Evolution

Year Built Stations Interchanges Shape Points Guideway (miles)

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

It seems as if the program did not correctly calculate years 3 5 and 6

Unfortunately I didnrsquot save each successive year as a separate file and could not do a year-by-year profit analysis or trips served analysis Also it would not be appropriate to assume that each station serves the same number of trips However given the hubs in Mercer and Trenton the profitability chart would most likely take off in the beginning as the densest areas are served by the network Towards years 3-5 the profitability would start to plateau as we start building stations in less dense areas and in years 5 onwards the profitability would start to gradually drop as in the attempt to serve 90 of the population the stations have to be built in progressively less populous areas

148 Room for Improvement and Conclusion

As with most counties one of the best ways to improve the reasonability of the network is to increase the accuracy of the data I think as of this year the Mercer County dataset is fairly reasonable for the large trip productions and attractions but as the number of trips decreases the sketchiness of the data increases For instance as mentioned earlier I performed a sanity check by searching for ldquoMcDonaldrsquosrdquo ldquoBurger Kingrdquo ldquoChipotlerdquo and ldquoWendyrsquosrdquo and not a single placemark showed up even though a handful of each are in Mercer While the dataset is very large I would say it is not quite exhaustive If next yearrsquos team could spend some time coming up with a new way of collecting datapoints (especially employment ones) that would go far in improving the meaningfulness of the PRT project As mentioned earlier categorizing the trips into dining shopping recreation etc would also add to the models representation of Mercer County transportation Moreover the assumption that interchanges incur no cost to build is relatively limiting In order to improve the systems representation to reality perhaps a (small) cost should be attached to the interchange such as $50000-$100000

In general the network succeeds in providing a profit while serving over 92 of the Mercer population I would definitely recommend Trenton and Princeton as starting points for a Mercer PRT network as many trips ends could be served for a reduced cost of capital If the majority of area residents start choosing PRT as their mode of transit then the county can start expanding to server more trip ends and defray costs with the profits from the initial networks I wouldnrsquot necessarily recommend building the networks directly sequentially thoughmdashI firmly believe that the optimal strategy would be to build the initial networks in year one and see how the networks perform profit-wise before expanding The switch from automobiles trains and buses to PRT would be neither quick nor easy Many companies and employees rely on the success of these forms transportation for a living and they will definitely put up a fight by cutting prices and expanding services until they can no longer survive The PRT system might not turn a profit for the first couple years but ideally ridership would continually expand as the other modes dwindle PRT will have to pass this initial test before expanding to fewer-trip zones

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

1511 General Features

Middlesex County NJ is the center of population for New Jersey It is located just south of New York City and is surrounded by the counties of Union Somerset Mercer and Monmouth It is approximately 323 square miles and has a population of 790738 as of 2009 or around 10 of the New Jerseyrsquos population32Furthermore it is one of the fastest growing counties in New Jersey with a percent population change from 2000 to 2009 of 54 (versus an average of 35 growth for the entire state of New Jersey)33

The population of Middlesex County is far from uniformly distributed The population is most densely populated in the north which is closer to New York City and is dominated by farms in the south Some of the most important areas in the county are the following

Corporations Merrill Lynch amp Company Johnson amp Johnson Telcordia Technology Prudential Insurance Company and Bristol-Myers Squibb

Hospitals Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital JFK Medical Center Raritan Bay Medical Center and St Peters University Hospital

Universities Rutgers University and Princeton Universityrsquos Forrestal Campus

Shopping Centers Brunswick Square Mall and Woodbridge Center Mall34

Train Stations Jersey Avenue Dunellen Station New Brunswick Edison Station Metuchen Metropark Station South Amboy Woodbridge Perth Amboy

1512 Transportation Demand

The current transportation in the state of New Jersey is pretty well developed In large part this is due to the existent NJ Transit network With both the light rail and bus services it provides people with quick access to different large cities in the state along with access to NYC Philadelphia nearby airports etc In addition there is a well-developed highway

32 httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434023html 33 httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434023html 34 For further information visit httpwwwcomiddlesexnjus

system with the Garden State Parkway and 95 running North-South By taking advantage of these pre-established systems the PRT network can dramatically benefit

1513 Assumptions in Making the Network

Beyond the existing transportation system in Middlesex we assume that therersquos a market for a system with the following traits efficient low-cost and convenient This way it will attract to the well-off community that resides in Middlesex County This however requires for a system that is well developed and provides short trip times In essence the only way this will attract people is if it is cheaper and faster

152 Initial Network

For the initial network I decided that the town of New Brunswick with Rutgers University as its main attraction was a good first start The demand for this type of transportation is not only high but also concentrated in a small area Both these features make this town a good test to the success of a PRT system in Middlesex County

The initial network contains 20 stations 54 interchanges and 3021 miles of guideway One of the key traits of this type of network is that it is very densely populated by people and hence by stations When this happens I took the approach of having a lot of connections through interchanges The idea behind this design is that people in college will only use a system that truly benefits them from a costbenefit perspective If it is inconvenient they will simply not use it and this will consequently put at jeopardy the success of the rest of the network

Figure 121- Initial Network of Rutgers University

1521 Taking a Closer Look

We can look at a closer area of the network to get an idea of how the general loop structure was complemented by two-way rails between interchanges This design allows for quick access to all areas from all locations Although this would prove tremendously expensive in the county as a whole a university campus is one of the rare scenarios where this would be beneficial

Figure 122- Loop within the Rutgers Network

Another reason for the high concentration of station is the high density of students Rutgers the state university of New Jersey has an enrollment figure of 5300035

Although not all students attend this campus there are professors workers of shops visitors etc

httpadmissionsrutgersedu

who travel to and from the university With attractionproduction number of trips above 20000 in a lot of areas it is necessary to have this many stations

153 Ultimate Network

In order to expand from the Rutgers University network to the rest of the county I started by making 8 initial networks As mentioned earlier the population is concentrated mostly in the north For this reason I placed 4 networks in the north (West Midwest Mideast East) 3 in the center (West Center East) and one in the south (Center)

To select candidates for these networks I chose areas with numerous school and housing These proved to be the locations with greatest demand for trips Once these 8 initial networks were all constructed it was easier to interconnect them and construct a full county-wide network Irsquoll show the full network next and later reflect on some of its unique features

1531 Quick Overview

The final network has 692 stations 721 interchanges and 73364 miles of guideway It serves 8926 of the total county trips Although it barely doesnrsquot meet the network demand of gt90 of the trips constructing the network to meet the additional 10 of trips would be increasingly inefficient The south contains a network that is defined by long guideway stretches with few stations This represents a lot of fixed costs for fewer number of trips Not surprisingly a majority of the remaining 10 resides in this part of the state The north is the opposite having a low ratio of guideway to station

1532 Image of the Network

154 Strategy and Development

1541 UrbanUniversitymdashRutgers

For urban areas within Middlesex such as the Rutgers network described above the strategy was to build interconnected loops and cycles to create a grid The natural grid network of streets made the network design relatively simple with stations at street crossings and guideway along the roads This would help the popularity of the PRT network since it wouldnrsquot be invasive to the preexistent system of transportation (roads stations etc) I think this system worked particularly well in Rutgers as the city contains a diverse mix of productions and attractions- dorms libraries apartments shops restaurants bars- and in general the concentric cycles allow for quick access to stations

Figure 123- Example of UrbanUniversity Style Network

1542 Suburban

My strategy in planning the suburban networks was to minimize the invasiveness of the system In general neighborhoods are very wary of how invasive a transportation system is to their current atmosphere House prices noises and landscape would all be negatively affected by too much of a PRT presence However by completely avoiding the suburbs we neglect an important part of the population and a very high number of trips For this reason I attempted to take a cost-benefit approach and try to maximize the productivity of the system within the suburban environment

To minimize invasiveness I used two-way guideway in many situations This seems to strike the best balance between the cost of having a PRT system in your neighborhood and the comfort of having a station nearby

Figure 124- Example of the Suburban Style Network

1543 Rural

I did not design an initial rural network as I mainly used these to interconnect the previous two network designs My basic strategy for rural areas was to make loops with one-way guideway and use two-way guideway only to connect loops or minimize invasiveness For an illustration see below

Figure 125- Example of Rural Style Network

A few points can be made on the above figures First the total number of trips is around 28 million Given a population of roughly 8 million this gives an average of 35 trips per person This seems to be relatively accurate to what is seen in the real world Additionally ldquopatron tripsrdquo make roughly about 13 of the total trips in the county For such a residential county such as Middlesex this goes along with what is to be expected Lastly the fact that there are more school trips than work trips can be explained by noticing that it is not always the case that both parents work However essentially all kids go to school

155 Finances

In order to assess the profitability of the network I ran the financial model provided to me in class First we look at some of the basic data that comes out of the model some of which was already expressed above

Networks Statistics Middlesex County

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

ends served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

Of greatest importance is the assumption that fare is $3 This will be talked about later under the ldquoPossible Improvementsrdquo section Similarly assuming that all trip types are assumed to be with 2 people seems limiting to the model This problem again will be addressed in the last section of the paper

Basic Costs Revenue Middlesex County

Stations Guideway Vehicles Total Cost of Capital Maintenance Operating Total Fare Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

At first look it is clear that the capital costs are substantial at $6732 B The projected PampL is of $113M Financing this project shown by ldquoCost of Capitalrdquo costs $539M in interestamortization Even so it is clear that there substantial profit that comes from the PRT system in Middlesex County

This seems logical since Middlesex is one of the most densely populated counties in NJ This type of network benefits from people living at close proximities This is due to the high passenger-to-guideway ratio

1551 Judgement

The success of the system in this county does not necessarily mean that it will experience similar profits in other places in NJ

In addition my development of the system was very thorough and provided very short trips for any trip in the county In a more realistic setting the PRT network would have fewer intricacies and would consequently have longer average-trip times This would further help the PampL figure of the county system

As an example last yearrsquos group opted on using fewer stations (256 vs my 692) fewer guideway miles (443 vs 734) Their PampL was of $700M since they stayed away of the southern part of the county which proves inefficiency Of course this came at the cost of 70 coverage instead of 90 Nonetheless this is the type of tradeoff present in these type of situations

156 Possible Improvements

1561 Fares

One of the major improvements that can be done to this system is that of changing the pricing scheme With the vast amounts of technology that will be used for all different components of the system adding a more dynamic price algorithm would not be of much difficulty

The basis for the system should be the one used in taxis today fixed charge with a variable cost dependent on length The main addition would need to be an adjustment to the variable cost specifically it would have to diminish by distance By this I mean that the cost for the first 5 miles should be higher than the price for the next 5 and so on This way the PRT system would be an encouraged form of transportation both for short and long trips

As can be seen from the graph even at an average fare of $4 the PampL jumps to above $400M making the return to investment even higher

1562 TripsVehicle

As mentioned above having 2 people per trip seems limiting For recreation trips this would probably higher while it would probably be lower in the case of work trips In any case even for a constant value 2 is a low estimate This benefits our estimates since we were being conservative

Important Observation Changing the assumption from 2 to 3 or 2 to 4 changes the PampL only slightly in comparison to the huge increase these shifts represent (3 people per car on average is probably too high) For the readerrsquos please the PampL numbers are $164M and $189M

157 Conclusion

Irsquove provided a general framework for a PRT system in Middlesex county of New Jersey The general approach seems to be in line with a hypothetical ldquofinal systemrdquo As I described in the previous section however there are some small changes that can be made to improve the modeling of the financial results

I would propose beginning with a network in Rutgers University like I described in one of the first sections This network would be a good probe of peoplersquos appetite for this type of transformation and ultimately an indicator of the possible success

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction Monmouth County the northernmost county on the Jersey Shore holds a 2009

population estimate of 644105 people and maintains a population density of about 1304-

people square mile With a total area of 665 square miles comprised of 2904 water and

rivers and bays leading to the New York Harbor Jamaica Bay and the Atlantic Ocean

Monmouth County is ranked 42nd among highest-income counties and 53rd in highest per capita

income in the United States However with the countyrsquos growing population and steep cost of

living the county suffers from obsolete infrastructure

The county is relatively flat and low-lying and the county seat is Freehold Borough while

the largest municipality by population is Middletown Township There are a total of 53

municipalities Monmouth County has a few relatively dense areas along its coast but also

some extremely isolated areas in the southwest In the summer months people flock to

Monmouth Countyrsquos shore making roads particularly congested Some other notable

attractions include Freehold Raceway ndash a horse racing arena Wall Stadium and Wall Ice Arena

On the border of Ocean County and Monmouth County are Six Flags Great Adventure Six Flags

Wild Safari and Six Flags Hurricane Harbor Monmouth County is also home to the Monmouth

County Mall as well as Monmouth University a private four-year university

There are 14 NJ Transit heavy rail stations and approximately 20 Park amp Ride locations

With a substantial number of commuters to New York and a seasonal influx of people traveling

to the beach during the summer Monmouth County would likely flourish with a PRT system

perhaps with the exception of its significant rural area in the Southwest

2009 ORF 467 PRT Proposal

More Information on Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

162 Placemark Data Our starting point in this PRT was examining the placemark data from last year From

the offset however it became clear that the data needed extensive altering due to a large

number of duplicate placemarks and values for workerspatrons that were obviously wrong (for

example 100000 patrons day at certain hospitals) Caroline and I agreed on a general

approach to cleaning up our data which included

bull Removing duplicate entries

bull Fixing the coordinates that were pointing to Antarctica

bull Double checking that some of the workplacesattractions were in the right place (using

Google Earth to cross reference the actual address)

bull Consolidating schools which were listed twice ndash under type 2 education and type 3

business

I then looked up data for rail station usage and decided to add 7000 train station

commuters on average per train station and 800 commuters in each park and ride This 7000

figure might seem a little high at a first glance but can be explained by the fact that Monmouth

County is home a large number of people who work in New York City

In addition we drastically changed patron numbers for service businesses that would

not necessarily attract many people per day (for example a Comcast office) Instead we

decided that such services as UPS delivery people plumbers etc would be counted as

patronsday in the housing section Instead of having zero patrons per day we set patrons to

1 of the population for each census block This addition did not drastically alter the results but

certainly helped account for these services which had not been added before

This much improved placemark information file allowed us to make much better

decisions when placing our stations

163 Initial Networks My initial 3 networks looked for dense heavily populated places that could serve as self-

sustaining parts of the county Two of them were located in the vicinity of the coast while the

other one focused on Middletown Township the countyrsquos largest town with a population of

roughly 66687 people

My first initial network covers Long Branch Monmouth University West Long Branch

the Monmouth County Mall and others The Long Branch NJ Transit Station provides access to

NYC which is where a high number of people in this county work Therefore access to a station

was crucial and I made sure to include at least 1 in this initial network This network contains a

small number of 2-way guideway The network is pictured below The left image shows the

network by itself while the second image shows the network once it was attached to the entire

network

My second initial network covers Middletown Township and includes 1 NJ Transit

station some shopping areas and the town center I deemed it important to have a PRT in this

area as it not only provides transportation to the people here but is also a symbol of moving

forward Once the most important places have the technology others will want to follow The

initial network is pictured below along with the stations connected with the whole network

included

My third initial network covers the Neptune and Asbury Park Areas (along the shore) 2

NJ Transit stations Brookdale Community College and Bradley Beach This network pays

particular attention to travel time and includes 9 interchanges to help minimize travel time and

provide easy of travel avoiding nonsensical trip routes As before the initial network is pictured

164 Building the Rest of the Network When I began the project my goal was to build a network that would grow over time

and eventually serve 90 of the people However I quickly realized that this would not be

achievable given that many parts of the county are not dense at all

For my final network I decided to look for the most logical places to place stations

Thus I added stations in places where the placemarks added up to a reasonable number of

people I looked to stay over 1000 people for each station a task that became increasingly

difficult once I reached the southwest part of the county My general approach was as follows

bull Keep the initial networks as being built in year 1 Then look to connect these networks by adding

stations in year 2

bull Work my way out from these initial networks moving west and south as necessary and

increasing the years I got further away from the initial networks

Following this approach I was able to cover approximately 80 (7965) of the population

by placing 681 stations 252 interchanges and 712 miles of guideway throughout the county

The next step was connecting this large set of stations This part required significantly more

analysis in order to make sure that the network made sense For example I looked to add grid-

like behavior in heavily populated areas in which crossing guideways would connect to main

guideways Below is an example of one area in which this worked successfully

In other cases however loops were necessary due to the sparse population being served by

the PRT These loops would be connected by to other sections of the county by one set of

guideway coming in and another going out as pictured below

On a year by year basis my network looks to be built mostly on years 1 and 5 This

would seem to make sense since after a few years people would become more used to the

idea of a PRT network and to her areas would begin to demand the service On the other hand

if the project wasnrsquot successful a five year period would be sufficient time realize this and not

build another large section of the network However this is an area in which my network could

be improved next year as it is not always spread out in the best possible way in terms of the

year that each section was built The statistics below show the network However there seems

to be a bug in the code that generated this data (for example interchanges information is

wrong) so only stations built per year should be given any serious consideration

Table 131 Evolution

Year Built Stations Interchanges Shape Points Guideway (miles)1 121 1038 252 252937 33 3052 69 50673 58 4509

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

165 Financial Analysis Because of the shortcomings of the year by year analysis that was given to us we

decided to follow the spreadsheet provided by Professor Kornhauser for our financial analysis

This spreadsheet required the trip information for each station total number of stations

interchanges guideways and cost of capital

For the trip ends served per day the program simply added up all the trips for all of the

stations For the total trips per day however the spreadsheet implemented a different

formula which equaled 5total trip ends served(ratio of trip ends served to total trip ends)

Since not all trips were served this resulted in lower total trips per day than total trip ends

served The peak hour trips were defined as 15 of the total trips per day and the fleet size

defined as (peak hour trips 10) 11 The average trip length was 5 miles average vehicle

occupancy of 2 and fare of $3ride These assumptions are summarized below

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

ends served Toal TripsPeak hour

Trips Fleet sizeAverage trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)681 252 72131 3559059 1417406 212611 23387 5 2 $300 020$

Networks Statistics Monmouth County

Under these assumptions the basic costs revenues and profits for Monmouth County are

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

Capital Costs Annual Recurring Costs Annual RevenueBasic Costs Revenue Monmouth County

In other words we see that under this set of assumptions (which accounts for the entire

network being built in year 1) the profit per year is about $357 million Below we plot a graph

showing the Profit amp Loss (PampL) for fare values between $1 and $5 per ride and we see that the

breakeven point is at a fare of approximately $220ride

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Cost per ride (in $)

Monmouth County PampL

Given the large capital requirements to build such a project it is comforting to find out

that under our set of assumptions the network would be profitable at such a reasonable rate

which we assume people would be willing to pay Unfortunately this analysis assumes that the

PRT would not be in competition with cars and other modes of transportation This is a large

shortcoming of our analysis and one that we would have looked much more closely into had

we had more time to work on this

166 Ridership Information As noted above our statistics are somewhat unrealistic due to high ridership

assumptions In this section we offer two graphs which show the ridership per station

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

Trip ends served per stationMonmouth County

This first graph shows us a breakdown of how many trip ends are served per station per

day We see that the largest spike occurs at around 37000 riders per day This number may

seem somewhat high Upon closer inspection however we note that it serves an area that

includes the Freehold Raceway Mall and Freehold Horse Track Thus it would make sense that

the ridership would be high in this area See picture below for visual explanation

We tracked down similar spikes and they all seem to make sense Indeed serving

37000 trip ends as our maximum sounds quite reasonable Below we include a sorted graph by

trip ends served per day Our results are quite reasonable once again

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

167 Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm (section written together with Caroline)36

We implemented Dijkstrarsquos algorithm in MATLAB to measure how efficient our networks

are To do this we used the ldquomatriceshtmlrdquo link provided by John and Nathan and followed the

simple instructions to obtain the distances traveled and the paths from each stations to each

other In the gravity method we implemented in the My City assignment we assumed that

distances between two zones were just 12 times the Cartesian distance of their centroids We

see now after applying Dijkstrarsquos algorithm to our network that in our last assignment we

made a gross simplification Although each of our counties are 916 square miles (Ocean County)

and 665 square miles (Monmouth County) the top ten distances between two stations running

along network guideway can reach as much as 108 miles for Ocean County and 74 for

Monmouth

The table below shows the top 20 largest station-to-station trips using this code

36 See appendix for MATLAB code

From this we clearly see that station 403 has some of the largest distances from other

stations Tracing the station though we noticed that this station as at one of the extremes of

the county In addition the path that one would follow from this station to ones at the other

end of the network is less than optimal

These figures highlight the trade off we made when creating our networks In an effort

to conserve money we purposely avoided constructing stations and consequently guideway

that would produce fewer than 1000 trips per day this cost consciousness caused us to serve

fewer than 90 of trips as per the initial goal Our conservative approach to laying stations

inevitably produced networks that were less efficient

Some more analysis on Dijkstra

bull The graph below produced on MATLAB highlights the sorted distances from each of the 681

stations to each other We notice a sharp increase towards the end this highlights the distances

tofrom extremes of the network

bull The graph below shoes the same information but combined (and sorted by distance) for all of

the stations From this we see that over 50 of the trips are less than 25 miles in length

Indeed the average trip distance I calculated came out to 2402 miles

bull In addition I present a sample vector of distances from one of the stations The station number

is 150 which corresponds to a heavily populated area around the Monmouth Mall (see map

included) The results are not very surprising and we notice the stations around 150 all have

very short distances This is to be expected

Station 150

trips (above) and map

(below)

bull We then compare the distances traveled to the ldquoairplane distancesrdquo (given by the Line of Sight

matrix) We divide each element in the cost (distances) matrix by the Line of Sight distance We

then remove the values along the diagonal which were 00 and produce the error ldquoNot a

Number (NaN)rdquo The average ratio turned out to be 235 This result seems very possible since

the road system is usually considered to have a ratio of 12 and the built network does not

provide as much flexibility We plot the mean actual distanceairplane distance for each station

and display the results below

The results from Dijkstrarsquos algorithm proved very interesting Indeed we were able to

trace which stations were not well connected and fix these minor mistakes and significantly

improve the networkrsquos performance (and statistics) This procedure allowed me to link stations

in a better way and to achieve total connectivity In addition the algorithm brought attention

to stations that were very nearby but had to travel very long distances to reach each other

because of inefficient paths After fixing all this I was able to achieve very reasonable results as

shown above This analysis in the end added an additional level of understanding that one

would not necessarily achieve without Dijkstrarsquos algorithm

168 Appendix 1 MATLAB Code for Dijkstra Implementation

A = csvread(JF40djmatcsv)

C = csvread(JF40guidewaydistcsv)

LoS = csvread(JF40-matrices-loscsv)

[costpath] = dijkstra(AC)

Bring attention to stations that arent connected to the network

This will prove total connectivity when there are no values of -1

for i = 1length(cost)

for j = 1length(cost)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

maximums = zeros(310)

newcost = cost

for i = 150

[r_val r_ind] = max(newcost[]1)

[col_val col_ind] = max(r_val)

maximums(1i) = r_ind(col_ind)

maximums(2i) = col_ind

maximums(3i) = newcost(r_ind(col_ind)col_ind)

newcost(r_ind(col_ind)col_ind) = 0

E = reshape(cost1463761)

d = sort(E)

Calculate actual distance airplane distance and remove diagonal

ratio = costLoS

for i = 1length(ratio)

for j = 1length(ratio)

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

Find the maximum values of the ratios in order to trace them and figure

out what the potential problems are

ratioVector = reshape(ratio1463761)

ratMax = zeros(31)

[r_val r_ind] = max(ratio[]1)

ratMax(1) = r_ind(col_ind)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

ratMax(3) = ratio(r_ind(col_ind)col_ind)

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(sort(ratioVector))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

Established on March 15 1739 Morris County is now the seventh largest county in the state of New Jersey It is noted for its median household income of $77 340 which makes it the sixth wealthiest county in the United States by this metric Morris County has an area of 481 square miles and had a population of 470212 according to the 2000 census Although large portions of the county are home to residential and suburban areas 53 Fortune 500 companies maintain a presence in Morris County including ATampT Pfizer Honeywell Novartis BASF and Verizon As a result 578 of Morris County residents do not leave the county when commuting to work For those who do leave many travel to neighboring Essex and Passaic County or into Manhattan Additionally Morris County does see an influx of commuting workers everyday as only 501 of workers employed in Morris County live in Morris County Thus when

designing a PRT network integrating the Morris County network into other countiesrsquo networks will be critical to developing a successful network

172 Transportation

Currently 19 stations on New Jersey Transitrsquos rail network serve Morris County Additionally Morris County is also home to the New Jersey Transit Morris County Bus System which consists of eight routes that serve the county Overall though only 42 of Morris County residents use public transportation while traveling to work while 812 travel by car truck or van while driving alone When compared to the rest of New Jersey Morris County residents do show a reluctance to use public transportation In New Jersey 92 of residents use public transportation to travel to work Obviously there is ample room growth with regards to public transportation in Morris County I would however be worried that residents simply might be reluctant to embrace public transportation

173 Data

The most important thing to note on the data is that it is simply is an estimate especially with regards to the data on businesses My first step upon receiving the data file was to remove all duplicate entries This took an extremely long time as schools were entered in the business as well as education category and many businesses were listed multiple times After accomplishing this to the best of my ability I tried to improve upon the existing numbers for people visitors and enrollment With regards to education I kept the existing enrollment numbers but needed to improve the people column I decided to divide the enrollment column by twelve This assumes a studentteacher ratio of twelve and ignores administrative employees Although this is a simplistic measure it was better than was had previously been there Next for businesses I found a table that listed the top employers in Morris County

I used this table to fill out the top employers if an employer had more than one location then I tried to split the total number of employees between the locations as sensibly as possible Then I made sure that no other people values for businesses were greater than the smallest value in the table I also found the total number of employed people in Morris County to be 276965 and made sure the total number of people in the business category was close enough to this value With the regards to the patron column for businesses I took this be too difficult to improve upon

I simply looked for any extreme values and tried to make sure that none existed Lastly I did not alter the recreation data points and updated the transportation data points so that the people column represents the daily ridership at each New Jersey Transit station

174 Initial Network

In order to see if PRT would be feasible for Morris County I began by designing two separate networks in two of Morris Countyrsquos denser areas As one can see from the figure below Morris County contains large areas of low-density residential areas in which a PRT network might not be feasible because of the potentially large distances between stations At the same time though Morris County does have high-density areas with commercial and residential zones in close proximity to one another Therefore for my initial network I decided to focus on the Morristown and Dover municipalities

I built two separate networks that would make use of a loop structure In total this initial network contained 31 stations 9 interchanges and 3067 miles of guideway while serving 270795 trip ends Below I have enclosed pictures of first the Morristown network and then the Dover network I have added the station coverage circles to give a better idea of the relative size of the network When designing both networks I tried to make each station serve at least 2000 trips ends to ensure the profitability of the network In addition I made extensive use of shape points to ensure that the network made use of Morris Countyrsquos existing road and railway network Even in these dense areas I found it difficult to do this because of the lack of straight roads within the county As a result I made use of a loop structure when building my network

because I felt this would best work with the shape of the roads within Morris County Then I used interchanges to make is so that passengers could easily transfer from loop to loop

My next step was to calculate the feasibility of this initial network Below are the calculations done to look at annual profitability along with the number of trip ends served by each station Note I determined it was unreasonable to use the percentage of trip ends for the entire county so I used 60 which is roughly the same as percent covered for my final network to

calculate total trip ends Additionally I changed the mode split factor to be linear because of the low coverage within Morris County Lastly all analysis done can be found in the attached spreadsheet MorrisTripAnalysisxlsx

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

ends served Total Trips Peak hour

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day)

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Fleet size Average trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)

1340 5 2 $300 $020

Capital Costs Annual Recurring Costs

Stations Guideway Vehicles Total Cost of Capital Maintenance Operating Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

Annual Revenue PampL

Fare Station lease and naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

From these calculations one can see that the initial network is predicted to make $27 million a year Therefore one can reasonably conclude that expanding the network to the entire county

is economically feasible as well When looking at the plot of trip ends served per station I saw that I managed to have most stations serve at least 5000 trip ends Only 7 of my stations fell below that benchmark From the analysis of the initial network I concluded that I needed to ensure that the remaining stations built continued to serve trip ends at a high level In a somewhat rural county such as Morris County this will mean the percent covered is not nearly as high but it should allow the final network to continue to make a profit

175 Final Network

Figure 141 Final PRT Network

Following the construction of my initial network I set out to expand and cover the remainder of Morris County This network is shown above It is important to understand that my final network could not possibly cover all of the trip ends in Morris County As one can see from the picture below Morris County has many large rural residential areas in which residents may find a PRT network to be too intrusive

Therefore I decided to avoid many areas like this believing that not only would the network be intrusive but also it might not be financially viable because of the amount of guideway needed to connect these rural stations In the end my final network had 334 stations 218 interchanges and 41396 miles of guideway Throughout the entire network I continued to use a basic loop structure and then used interchanges to link the successive loops together I made extensive use of shape points so that my network could follow the pre-established road and railway network in Morris County This final network covers 2113517 out of 3402873 trip ends which is a 6211 coverage ratio I decided that this final coverage percentage would be ideal adding additional stations increased the guideway amount while adding too few trip ends

Below I have included pictures that show the different types of areas within Morris County that my network covers First I have included a picture of the network in the Mount Olive area a rural residential area in the southwest corner of Morris County

As one can see an extremely large amount of guideway is needed to connect the stations and in certain areas two-way guideway is needed Areas like this though were generally avoided when building my final network Next I will show a picture from Netcong which is on the western border of Morris County

I included this picture because I felt that it gave an accurate representation of a typical area within Morris County It is not especially dense but had enough trip ends to justify multiple stations which loop together through the use of various interchanges Additionally I also felt this picture showed the need for an extremely high number of shape points if one wanted to follow the pre-established road network Next I will show pictures that represent the extremely dense areas of Morris County First I included a picture of Dover and its surrounding area to show the growth from the initial network More stations were added to satisfy the amount of trip ends in the area and a number of interchanges were added so that all of the loops could become interconnected Highly dense areas such as Dover make it potentially possible to have a profitable PRT network for Morris County

Lastly I will include another section of the network in a highly dense area Parsippany

As the network moved into the highly dense areas I tried to add as many loops as I could in order to lessen trip lengths This meant the addition of a number of interchanges to connect all of the resulting loops My final network had a 153 station to interchange ratio which I feel is fairly low for a county that has as many rural areas as Morris County Additionally superposition of station coverage started to occur in these areas but because of the population density this is hard to prevent

After completing this network I next plotted the number of trip ends per station which is shown below

I was pleased with this outcome of this plot Only 46 out of 334 or 1377 of stations serve less than 2000 trip ends a day and only 15 out of 334 sort or 45 of stations serve less than 1000 trip ends a day I felt that my network did a good job avoiding unprofitable stations as the presence of a small number of unprofitable stations can easily be subsidized by the presence of so many profitable stations Next one might notice that my top three stations serve 45675 31971 and 29258 trip ends respectively and question how that is possible in Morris County Thus I went back to each station and examined its location to see if any error occurred My station with the highest number of trip ends serves Atlantic Health Systems the second largest employer in Morris County a large census placemark as well as countless of small business placemarks I enclosed a picture of this situation below The station with the second highest number of trip ends serves two census placemarks of size 10152 and 17384 which accounts for the number of trip ends served Lastly the station with the third highest number of trip ends serves a census placemark of size 26660 Therefore although this stations serve a relatively high number of trip ends I feel comfortable with the numbers

My next step in analyzing my final network was to look at its annual profit and loss using the Excel sheet provided The results are shown below

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips Peak hour

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

Stations Guideway Vehicles Total Cost of Capital Maintenance Operating Total (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

As one can see this analysis predicts my final network for Morris County will make $122 million a year This shows that despite a low coverage percentage a network can still be profitable I feel that by ensuring that nearly all stations served at least 2000 trips and not using excess guideway I was able to keep my network profitable My next step in the analysis was to find the break-even fare for Morris County This produced the following plot which shows that the break-even fare for Morris County is roughly $240

Improvements and Conclusion

From the analysis done above one can tell that it is possible to build a profitable network within Morris County Improvements can be made to the analysis though to give a more accurate picture First the underlying data set needs to be improved Most importantly better data on businesses needs to be inputted Not all businesses in Morris County are included some employee numbers are inaccurate and the patron number is not well established Unfortunately it seems as though this problem will be difficult to solve Second more analysis can be done with regards to building the Morris County PRT progressively The mix between rural and highly dense areas in Morris County makes this analysis even more pertinent For example building the most profitable stations earlier will allow the subsidization of stations that serve fewer trip ends This type of analysis could allow the next Morris County PRT builder to better understand the optimal coverage percentage for Morris County I stopped my network at 62 coverage because I felt as though adding more stations would not maintain profitability looking back I wish I had a better way to determine this value Finally further work can be done to connect a network in Morris County to the rest of New Jersey Research shows that 42 of Morris County residents leave the county everyday for work If the Morris County PRT could serve these trips ends then it could become even more profitable and perhaps subsidize even more rural stations

In conclusion the network I built for Morris County does a good job of showing the potential for PRT This network covered 62 of trip ends within Morris County while trying to adhere to the already established road and railway network In addition by charging $300 a fare the system is projected to make $109 million a year In a county as wealthy as Morris County increasing the fare might not decrease ridership much at all so more profit could potentially be made As a long-term project it definitely seems feasible to begin building the network in the most profitable areas in early years while slowly adding the less profitable stations This could result in the added benefit of increasing the total coverage percentage for Morris County

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

Ocean County located fifty miles east of Philadelphia seventy miles south of New York

and twenty miles north of Atlantic City holds a 2007 census estimated population of 558531

people with a density of 803 people per square mile Toms River is the county seat and both

the township and the county as a whole are one of the fastest growing areas in New Jersey

since the 1990s Ocean County is the second largest county by area (916 square miles) in New

Jersey and is comprised of 3053 water Monmouth County borders the north Atlantic County

the south and Burlington County the west The county is a particular hotspot during the

summer months due to its extensive eastern border of the Atlantic Ocean

The county consisting of 33 municipalities boasts several well-known beaches including

Seaside Heights Long Beach Island Point Pleasant Beach and Surf City Yoursquore almost

guaranteed to endure heavy congestion on Route 37 crossing the Barnegat Bay to the Barnegat

Peninsula when the weatherrsquos hot The area is so popular that MTVrsquos great reality hit ldquoJersey

Shorerdquo films most of its episodes in Seaside Heights Public transportation is not very well

developed and the local roads become so clogged that traffic may seem unbearable at times

The largest Six Flags theme park Six Flags Great Adventure is located in the

northwestern part of the county along with Six Flags Wild Safari and Six Flags Hurricane Harbor

Although a large portion of the county is the hub of summer activity the county also serves as

the northeastern gateway into the Pine Barrens and is home to several state parks including

Barnegat Lighthouse Island Beach Double Trouble and Jackson State Forest among others

With an influx of people in the summer months going to the shore or Six Flags it is difficult to

say whether a PRT would be profitable year-round Certainly the more rural western part of the

county might not be suitable to a PRT system at least in the early stages of development

More Information on Ocean County

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

To determine whether a PRT system would be advisable in Ocean County we first

needed to input the coordinates of all major locations in the county Fortunately past years

had already compiled a substantial amount of data with latitude and longitude coordinates and

had provided estimates of people patrons per day enrollment etc Before adding additional

locations I scrutinized the existing data and adjusted figures that I felt were exaggerated I

noticed that several of the companies listed would more likely be making house calls than

working on site at the company headquarters and so I drastically decreased the number of

employees listed as working at several locations To compensate for this decrease I assumed

that 1 of the entire population of Ocean County (represented in type 1 housing data) was in

receipt of some service call each day ndash whether it be a cleaning staff a UPS delivery an internet

service provider etc This 1 increase was represented in the type 1 data under ldquoPatrons per

Dayrdquo I used the ldquofloorrdquo function in Excel to ensure that my calculations would all yield integers

After critical examination of all figures I used Google Earth to find additional placemarks

that may not have been considered Google Earth presented all data points in degrees minutes

and seconds so I converted this measure into decimal points to be consistent with the already-

existing CSV file I included several supermarkets Wawas Wal-Marts and commercial banks

and in total I added over 30 placemarks

183 Initial Networks

The first network I developed is along Route 37 beginning at the cloverleaf interchange

with the Garden State Parkway Starting at the Garden State Parkway allows cars to park and

take the PRT to the beach just after leaving the parkway Route 37 runs along the border of

Toms River the county seat and Island Heights and crosses the Barnegat Bay to the Barnegat

Peninsula where summer hotspots like Seaside Heights are located Due to vacationers and

rapid growth in commercial development Route 37 is often congested especially in the

summer Although there is a bus along the road to the shore the vast amount of congestion

makes a PRT network seem like a much more viable solution

I faced two challenges building my first network The peninsula is quite isolated from the

main land with only one bridge on the southern end and the land is so narrow that a ldquostring-of-

pearlsrdquo network is really the only option lest we lose money placing incoming stations too close

to outgoing stations The only option I deemed possible was creating two-way guideway for

both the bridge crossing and the majority of the peninsula Although the shore is a craze during

the summer we would want to be cautious before developing in this area that we wouldnrsquot

lose vast amounts of money for the remaining three quarters of the year

The second network I developed is in Toms River with Route 37 running through it I

found this township to be particularly dense especially with the Ocean County Mall and the

largest suburban school district in the state This network situated on the mainland was far

easier to develop and I connected a series of cycles with interchanges to allow for maximum

mobility Inserting the interchanges I paid particular attention to travel time so that people

would not be going outing of their way on any given trip With the exception of the narrow

bridge in the bottom left corner of the image connecting some residential areas to the main

attractions there is no two-way guideway in this network

Because there are about six million visits to Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson NJ

each year I wanted my third network to serve Six Flags Unfortunately other than the three Six

Flags sites and Jackson Outlets the northwestern portion of the county is quite rural The

network is not nearly as intricate as the one I created for Toms River however I still attempted

to maintain the cyclic design from before The area also appears to be swampy so I had to use

additional guideway to ensure the PRT would not run through these swamp zones The rural

area required a lot more guideway than I expected

Preliminary financial analysis of these three networks is included in the appendix

Figure 152 View of Northeast

Figure 153 View of Northwest

Figure 154 View of South

In the final network I connected a series of cycles using interchanges wherever possible

The networks were rather intricate all along the eastern portion of the county however the

center and western areas were quite a bit more spread out Because Six Flags is located in the

rural western area though I still found it necessary to provide outlets to these less frequented

rural areas As a result there are often several miles of guideway in central Ocean County with

fewer stations

184 Network Statistics The tool indicated that stations serving less than 1000 trips were not profitable and so I

attempted to serve at least 1000 as much as possible Often the rural areas did not reach this

many trips which explains why some portions of the aerial view seem spottier I completed the

network with 702 stations and 287 interchanges totaling 75345 miles of guideway This

corresponds to 1240621 trips per day and we assumed the average trip length to be 5 miles I

reached 8354 service in Ocean County which is shy of the 90 goal primarily because of the

less dense western region The chart below summarizes these network statistics

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Networks Statistics Ocean County

The trip ends served by day according to ascending station ID number are shown below

Reordering the graph by descending number of trips it is easy to see that the bulk of

stations about 650 make less than 10000 trips per day and that there are only 16 stations that

have trips served in excess of 20000 trips The maximum number of trips made is 42356 trips

while the lowest number of trips which happens to be especially low is 392 trips

185 Network Financials From the network statistics chart above we assumed the average vehicle

occupancy was 2 and the fare was $3ride We also defined the peak period as

carrying 15 of the total trips per day and from this we calculated the fleet size as

(peak hour trips10)11 Recall that it costs $2 million to build each station and

$5 million for every mile of guideway Vehicle costs are assumed to be 010 times

the total fleet size while maintenance costs are 2 of the total cost A few other

assumptions on costs also defined in the chart below suggest that were we to

implement the entire network in one year we would reap a profit of $234 million

Stations Guideway Vehicles Total Cost of CapitaMaintenanc Operating Total Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

Capital Costs Annual Recurring Costs Annual RevenueBasic Costs Revenue Ocean County

Analyzing further we see that the break-even fare is about $245 which is

incredibly low And given the size of the county 916 square miles itrsquos likely

people will be traveling several miles to get to a number of their destinations

Thus a fare of even $350 could be reasonable and would reap profits even

greater than expected

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

186 Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm (section written together with Julio) We implemented Dijkstrarsquos algorithm in MATLAB to measure how efficient our networks

simple instructions to obtain the distances traveled In the gravity method we implemented in

the My City assignment we assumed that distances between two zones were just 12 times the

Cartesian distance of their centroids We see now after applying Dijkstrarsquos algorithm to our

network that in our last assignment we made a gross simplification Although each of our

counties are 916 square miles (Ocean County) and 665 square miles (Monmouth County) the

top ten distances between two stations running along network guideway can reach as much as

10842 miles for Ocean County and 6971 miles for Monmouth

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

See appendix for MATLAB code

Looking closely at the above chart it appears that the same cluster of ending stations

cause difficulty and if I had more time I would add more interchanges in the area so that this

subsection would be more properly linked to the overall network

What we deem most advisable would be to begin construction on the conservative end

that we have upheld in our final network design and hold off on investigating technical

inefficiencies until the network has proven itself sustainable and profitable in the long run

Appendix of MATLAB code for Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm

A = csvread(oceanadjmatcsv)

C = csvread(oceanguidewaydistcsv)

LoS = csvread(ocean-loscsv)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

[r_val r_ind] = max(cost[]1)

maximums(3i) = cost(r_ind(col_ind)col_ind)

cost(r_ind(col_ind)col_ind) = 0

Appendix of Preliminary Financials

(not comparable to ultimate financial analysis)

Network 1 From Garden State Parkway Cloverleaf Interchange along Route 37 to Barnegat Peninsula

Figures assuming 144915 Trips per day

Cost of One-way Guideway $-

Cost of Two-way Guideway $14712000000

Cost of Stations $4600000000

Total Building Cost $19312000000

Upper Bound Total Building Cost $21243200000

Annual Maintenance $424864000

Average Trip Length $1839

Annual Operating Cost $9727202003

Annual Interest Cost $1274592000

Total Annual Cost $11426658003

Annual Fares Revenue $15868192500

Annual Rent $82800000

Total Annual Revenue $15950992500

Anticipated Annual Revenues Anticipated Annual Costs 140

Total Revenue after 30 years $478529775000

Total Cost after 30 years $364042940075

Revenue less Cost after 30 years $114486834925

Number of Trips 144915

Number of Miles of One-way Guideway 0

Number of Miles of Two-way Guideway 2452

Number of Stations 23

Average of Guideway Ridden 075

Cost per mile of One-way Guideway 5000000

Cost per mile of Two-way Guideway 6000000

Cost of Station 2000000

Operating Cost per Mile 02

Maintenance Cost on Capital 002

Threshold Upper Bound Capital Cost 11

Average Number of Riders in Vehicle 2

Average Fare Paid 3

Rent Paid Per Month Per Station 3000

Interest Rate on Bond 006

To justify building the project we would need to be making at least 54860 trips per day which

is considerably lower than the estimated number of trips But we must keep in mind that we

donrsquot currently have information on productions and attractions so the actual trips in the

network are likely quite a bit lower than 144915 In addition this network caters specifically to

the summer season since a majority of the stations are on the peninsula along the beach In

the winter season we would anticipate a drastic drop in trip demand to this area

Network 2 In Toms River traveling to local high schools medical centers the mall restaurants and residential areas

Cost of One-way Guideway $9675000000

Average Fare Paid 3

network are likely quite a bit lower than 217180

Network 3 Six Flags Great Adventure Water Park Jackson Outlets Residential

Figures Assuming 129922

Cost of Two-way Guideway $-

Average Fare Paid 3

is unfortunately not too much lower than the estimated number of trips

19 Passaic County

191 Introduction Passaic county lies in the northeast region of the state of New Jersey neighbored by

Bergen Essex Morris and Sussex counties of New Jersey as well as Orange and Rockland counties of New York Its total area is 197 square miles comprised of 185 square miles of land and 12 square miles of water According to the 2000 census Passaic has an approximate population of 489049 people thus the average population density is 2639 people per square mile However we can see from the population density map below that the population is not uniformly distributed across the county some urban areas have a density of over 10000 people per square mile while other areas like the West Milford township are much less populated The average household size is approximately 292 and the median household income $49210 The population is distributed as follows 2610 under the age of 18 930 from 18 to 24 3130 from 25 to 44 2130 from 45 to 64 and 1210 65 and older For more information on demographics and population distribution refer to sections 172 and 173 of the report ORF467F08

Due to its mountainous terrain and relatively small population Passaic has a less extensive network of roads than some other counties but thatrsquos not to say it doesnrsquot have any In fact there are several major highways running through the county such as the Garden State Parkway Interstates 287 and 80 and US Routes 202 46 23 21 20 19 4 and 3 Therefore it will be viable and worthwhile to develop this PRT network as a replacement for the majority of automobile traffic throughout the county Passaic is also home to a well functioning system of public transportation Three train lines including the Main Line of New Jersey Transit operate in the county as well as multiple New Jersey Transit bus routes We do not aim to replace these public transportation operations but rather to supplement them

The trips we intend to serve with PRT include travel to and from home work school and recreation Passaic Countyrsquos private sector labor force consists of 240000 people (as of 2007)mdashalmost half of the population There is also a large number of schools throughout the county from nursery schools and child care through elementary middle and high school all the way up to university level education We found most of our trips to be between home and work or school as there are not many commercial or recreational zones in Passaic For more details on employment education and recreation refer to sections 177 176 and 178 respectively of the report ORF467F08

192 Data The main changes we had to make in terms of the data provided by last yearrsquos students

was regarding the number of patron trips at each professional location As it was the number of patron trips had been estimated by multiplying the number of employees at each location by 50 This resulted in an unreasonably high number of patron trips per day in the countymdasharound 8 million In order to fix this and come up with a more reasonable estimate of patron trips I changed the multiplying factor to 10 which resulted in a little less than 2 million patron trips per day With Passaicrsquos population of approximately 500000 that makes approximately 4 trips per day per person which is a much more reasonable estimate Furthermore in order to make the data as accurate as possible I did not use this factor of 10 as a strict rule While going through the data I tried to make sure the numbers made sense For instance for a private practice doctorrsquos office with one employee the multiple of 10 makes sense as it could be expected to have just ten customers a day but a pharmacy with one employee would probably service more people in a daymdashprobably closer to 100

Another issue with the data was school enrollment numbers In last yearrsquos data schools were not separated into their own category with enrollment numbers and instead were given patron numbers that were twice the actual enrollment This along with many schools being listed twice resulted in far too high a number of school trips per daymdasharound 600000 which is larger than the entire population I did my best to correct this data and make it as accurate as possible with a final result of 256972 possible student trips which still may be a little high but is much more reasonable than before

193 PRT Network Proposal As discussed previously the population of Passaic is not uniformly distributed throughout the county It is much more populated in the lower half and then thins out as you move north Based on this we decided to start with an initial network in the lower half servicing one of the most populated areasmdashthe area surrounding Montclair State University The University has an enrollment of 15600 students (graduate and undergraduate) and the area is also home to the MSU train station making it an ideal place to start building a network From there we decided to build out in the second phase covering most of the lower region of Passaic In stage 3 we would start moving up and in the final phase we will build up this part of the network to service more trips in the upper region of Passaic in addition to all of those already served in the lower region Below is an image of our final network

We strategically placed stations to service as many trip ends as possible without too much overlap In terms of guide way we took inspiration from the one way streets of New York City to create what we think is an efficient system These concepts that we used for stations and guide way are displayed in the following close ups of the network

Of course we do not want guide way running through houses golf courses or peoplesrsquo back yards so once we had all of the tracks laid down we went back and inserted shape points to ensure that it will follow the already existing roads of Passaic

194 Network Evolution Initial Network (Phase 1)mdashYear 1 For the initial network we decided to service part of the lower more populated region of Passaic We chose to start with the area surrounding Montclair State University With an enrollment of 15600 and the nearby MSU train station which according to information gathered from New Jersey Transit boards 597 people on an

average weekday this seems like a promising place to start Below is a close up of the immediate area displaying the University the train station and other nearby features

After placing our very first station right next to the University we began to expand outward from there aiming to service a good chunk of the bottom of Passaic in phase 1 This initial network consists of 60 stations potentially serving 1106326 trips already (2482 of total trips) Below is a full image of the initial network followed by in depth data regarding the network trips served and financial information

Table 161 Networks Statistics Costs and Revenues for Phase 1

Phase 1 Passaic County

Trip ends served

home school work patron transit landmarks Total

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

County Total Trip Ends 1956196 256972 328014 1907192 7676 64

4456114

Networks Statistics Passaic County

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Basic Costs Revenue Passaic County

Stations Guidewa

y Vehicles Total Cost of Capital

enance Operating Total Fare

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Phase 2mdashYear 8 In phase 2 we will expand coverage of the lower more populated region of Passaic With 218 stations potentially serving 3315634 trips phase 2 will provide 7438 coverage Below is an image of the expanded phase 2 network along with trip information and financial data

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Phase 3mdashYear 15 In phase 3 we will begin to extend the network north into the less populated area of Passaic At this point we will have 292 stations potentially serving 3782984 trips (8486 service) Phase 3 network image trip information and financials follow

Trip ends served

home school work patro

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

e Operating Total Fare

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Final Network (Phase 4)mdashYear 20 In the final phase we will extend coverage in the upper region of Passaic to service its most populated areas With 369 stations in this final network we could potentially serve 3997614 tripsmdashthatrsquos 8968 of all trips in Passaic county

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

From this plot we can see that the break even fair is approximately $168 With our chosen fare of $3 we will be able to finance the project and make significant profit about $713 million per year

195 Conclusion We think that our proposed PRT network would be very beneficial to Passaic County It would be a monumental step in the future of transportation With PRT we can reduce congestion on roads and reduce air pollution due to automobile use We propose to serve the vast majority (8968) of all current automobile trips in Passaic This network would be a supplement to rather than a competitor with preexisting New Jersey transit linesmdashwe aim only to create an alternative to the automobile With this four phase development plan the development of the network will be a feasible smooth transition The total capital cost of the entire network is $6447 but with the four stage development plan this capital cost will be spread over 20 years Furthermore by the completion of the project we expect it to have an annual profit of $713 million If we follow through with the development of this PRT network it will be beneficial not just environmentally but financially

20 Salem County Jonathan Erlichman and Kexing Christina Ren

Salem County is located at the Southwest most corner of New Jersey and is located next to Gloucester County Cumberland County in New Jersey and Kent and New Castle County in Delaware It was created in 1694 and is considered to be the Garden Spot of the Garden State It is bounded by the Delaware River and the Maurice River to the west and east respectively37 Salem has a total area of 373 square miles with total land area of 338 square miles half of which is used for farming purposes According to the US Census Bureau It has a population of about 65 000 residents making it the county with the lowest population and the lowest density in New Jersey It is apparently also one of the older county in New Jersey

Salem is a relatively rural county with approximately half of its land area used for farming According to the countyrsquos website it has six rivers over 34000 acres of meadow and marshland 40 lakes and ponds bay beaches and numerous streams and important headwaters Municipalities in Salem Table 171 From 2000 Census Data

Salem County

37 httpwwwsalemcountynjgovcmssitedefaultaspcontentID=505

1 Elmer Borough 1343 09

2 Woodstown Borough 3136 16

3 Salem City 5857 28

4 Penns Grove Borough 4886 09

5 Oldsman Township 1798 203

6 Carneys Point Township 7684 178

7 Pilesgrove Township 3923 351

8 Mannington Township 1559 394

9 Pennsville Township 13194 248

10 Elsinboro Township 1092 133

11 Lower Alloways Creek Township 1851 311

12 Quinton Township 2786 245

13 Alloway Township 2774 332

14 Upper Pittsgrove Township 3468 405

15 Pittsgrove Township 8893 459

201 Demographic Summary Table 172 Age Breakdown

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

Table 1 Age Breakdown

According to the 2000 census there were 24295 households and 17370 families residing in the county with a total of 26158 housing units and an average density of 77 people per square mile The average household size is 260 and the average family size is 308 persons

202 Population Density Map of Salem County

Source 2000 Census Data

203 Economic Summary The median household income for a household in the county was $45573 and the median income for a family was $54890 The per capita income for the county was $20874 Comparing this to the median household income for New Jersey which is $70347 and a per capita income level of $2700638

According to data from 2008 105 of the residents of Salem live below the poverty line compared to 85 in the entire state of New Jersey Because Salem is a relatively poorer state we felt that it was only necessary to build stations in areas where there are higher population densities so that the network would actually be profitable

we can see that Salem is a relatively poorer county

204 Education Summary Salem has 30 to 40 schools each serving around 100 to 600 students each Because of this it was difficult to build stations near the smaller schools as there would not be enough ridership to make it worth operating a station in those areas

205 Transportation Summary There are many roads that serve the residents of Salem County from major country routes such as CR 540 CR 551 to state highways such as Routes 45 and 47 as well as US Routes 40 and 130 I-295 and the New Jersey Turnpike also pass through Salem although there is only one interchange for the turnpike in Salem (where it ends)39

39 httpenwikipediaorgwikiSalem_County_New_Jersey

Due to the low population numbers in Salem County there really is not a well developed public transportation system Because of this the main method of transportation in the county is by personal car According to the 2000 Census data 12 of the residents of Salem take public transportation to go to work and 933 of residents travel by automobile NJ Transit does not have a train system in Salem Thus we believe that Salem is a good county to put in a (smaller) PRT network

206 PRT Network The following is the entire final network of Salem County Note that there are clusters of stations in the Northwestern portion of the county and two clusters one in the middle of the county and the other on the lower east portion of the county There are only a total of 173 stations in the county with a total of 49 interchanges and 1835 miles of guideway

Figure 171 PRT Network in the Northwest

The network in the Northwest is close to a grid and we chose this so that we could minimize construction costs for the network in the county This is one of the more populated regions of Salem County and is perhaps the most profitable area

For Salem we managed to get 7439 coverage We feel that more work in searching for the smaller stations that arenrsquot necessary is needed as they arenrsquot profitable and it would make more sense to just build in the areas that have more population

207 Years Built Due to the fact that Salem is such a small county we decided that itrsquod make sense to build it over a much smaller time horizon We recommend starting by building in the more populated regions so that we would be able to get an idea of how profitable itrsquod be and then build stations wherever therersquod be enough ridership We chose to build the complete network over 4 years and not over a horizon of 20 years because we felt that Salem could very well become more developed in the next two decades and then it would make more sense to redo the network for the areas that are currently still rural

The following is a table that indicates how many stations interchanges shapepoints and miles of guideway are built for each year Table 173 Evolution

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

208 PRT Network Summary The following is a summary of the Network statistics for Salem County Table 174 Network Statistics

Graph of Trip Ends served per station in Salem County (Decreasing order)

From these tables and graph we can see that there are again 173 stations in the county (compared to over 400 in Gloucester County) which allows for 7439 of the county to be able to use the PRT network (to be within 025 mi of a station)

Graph of PampL Based on Different Fare Prices

Figure 173 PampL for Different Fares in Salem County

From this graph we can easily see that the breakeven price for the network lies around $280 We would recommend pricing each ride slightly higher than what we have in the summary statistics table because when the costs of maintaining and expanding the network go up it would become much more difficult to raise the per-ride price due to human psychology

209 Notes for future networks As with the other networks we noticed that some of the placemarks had data that was unreasonable We suggest to next yearrsquos class that they pay attention to the placemarks and make sure that there arenrsquot duplicates (which we have hopefully gotten rid of) and look at placemarks to determine whether or not the numbers are reasonable We realized that some numbers were unreasonable after we finished with our network but by then it became somewhat difficult to find where the stations were and to delete them To combat the unreasonable numbers that were given to us we scaled the recreation trips by a constant factor so that wersquod be able to get the expected number trips to be around 5

We also realized rather late that there were some issues with the placement of certain stations (due to the problems caused by the ldquowiggle effectrdquo and thus we built stations when the display

showed that itrsquod be profitable when it in actuality wasnrsquot) If we could remove the stations more easily wersquod definitely do so so that would be an area to look into improving for next year

21 Somerset County

source httpwwwcosomersetnjuswebimagesMuni2008jpg

211 Introduction

Somerset county is one of the smallest counties in New Jersey due to the fact that it is 305 square miles and has a population of only 324563 people40

The places with the largest populations include Franklin Township Bridgewater Township and Hillsborough Township Some of the places with the largest attractions include the Raritan Valley Community College and Somerset Christian College the Commerce Bank Park the Bridgewater Mall the US Golf Association and other business headquarters that supply much of the employment in the state Park amp Ride stations and New Jersey Transit stations also attract many people due to commuting and other travel around the state and into New York Overall there are 6454 placemarks that went in to building this PRT network

It is also a very affluent part of the state and is made up of many New York City commuters who utilize the New Jersey Transit system Much of the population lives in sparsely populated neighborhoods strewn about the county This allows for 10000 acres of the county to be devoted to parks and other open space areas

For further information and descriptions of the county including land use and further trip information please see the reports put together from years past (Orf467F08 or Orf467F09)

40 httpwwwcosomersetnjusabouthtml

Overall there were 3 initial networks for Somerset County They were placed in the areas around North Branch Bound Brook and Basking Ridge These three locations were dense enough and had many attractions making them a profitable place to start the PRT network

The following pictures charts and graphs show the data associated with each initial network

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

home school work recreation patron transit Totala 1 3144 925 0 0 8380 0 12449b 2 351 0 0 0 2358 0 2709c 3 24 0 351 0 1376 0 1751d 4 0 0 4053 0 2730 0 6783e 5 0 0 1200 26 3482 0 4708f 6 0 0 7671 0 3084 0 10755g 7 0 0 8355 6 10670 0 19031h 8 0 19224 789 0 2630 0 22643i 9 0 0 50094 0 3696 0 53790j 10 0 0 309 0 1030 0 1339k 11 501 0 0 0 702 0 1203l 12 0 0 9114 0 2636 0 11750m 13 0 0 1029 0 3430 0 4459n 14 0 0 2406 0 6880 0 9286o 15 0 0 252 0 840 40000 41092

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

10187Trips served (per day)

Trip ends served by station somerset County

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Trip Ends Served per StationHighest to Lowest

Miles of Guideway

served Toal TripsPeak hour

Trips Fleet size Average trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)15 4 1717 203748 10187 1528 168 5 2 300 020

Networks Statistics County Somerset

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

Basic Costs Revenue County SomersetCapital Costs Annual Recurring Costs Annual Revenue

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

home school work recreation patron transit Totala 1 0 3993 10326 0 2180 20000 36499b 2 0 0 10326 0 2180 0 12506c 3 1755 0 0 0 2778 0 4533d 4 1791 0 0 0 2898 0 4689e 5 0 39 1088 0 1440 0 2567f 6 0 0 846 0 1890 0 2736g 7 0 1672 6600 0 690 0 8962h 8 0 1226 825 0 2750 0 4801i 9 270 0 0 0 900 0 1170j 10 0 4680 1665 0 4638 0 10983k 11 1176 0 0 0 2990 0 4166

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Trip ends served by station Somerset County

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

2123 Network 3 Trip Ends

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

home school work recreation patron transit Totala 1 0 0 333 0 1110 0 1443b 2 0 0 4401 0 8022 0 12423c 3 0 0 4311 0 9330 0 13641d 4 0 0 3018 0 5326 0 8344e 5 0 681 7518 0 10444 0 18643f 6 0 0 7713 0 11094 0 18807g 7 87 0 168 1340 290 0 1885h 8 336 0 0 0 1120 0 1456i 9 1383 465 48 386 206 0 2488j 10 0 0 330 0 1100 0 1430k 11 0 0 723 0 2410 0 3133l 12 0 0 2964 0 9680 0 12644m 13 0 0 588 0 1960 0 2548n 14 345 2915 0 0 1150 0 4410o 15 0 0 285 0 950 0 1235p 16 750 0 0 0 1000 0 1750q 17 750 0 0 0 1000 0 1750

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

Due to the wealth size and sparse population of Somerset County there are many places where a PRT station is just not profitable But the stations laid out in this plan are profitable for the most part These stations are positioned in order to create the most use out of them they are put in highly condensed areas But this does not allow for all residents to use the stations it is necessary for some users to have to walk more than frac14 mile For the most part all major attractions have a station within frac14 mile Overall this network has 548 stations170 interchanges and 494 miles of guideway This system allows for 2143445 trip ends per day and 638375 trips per day giving just less than 80 service There are discrepancies between this network and that of last year This is because in last years report this county only had 2873 placemarks which allowed them to create a much smaller network than this one which has 6453 placemarks Overall this network looks like this

In order to make the network as efficient as possible the design included loops grid-like structures and series of interchanges Loops allowed for easy travel within a neighborhood or highly populated area They also had interchanges incorporated into them in order to allow travelers easy access to the rest of the network The grid-like structures allowed for easy travel in the densely populated areas because travelers paths could easily be maneuvered without going through unnecessary lengths Finally the series of interchanges allows for easy choice of path It allows the travelers to have shorter distances to travel and therefore makes the network cheaper and more efficient

2131 Grid-like structure

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

For full trip end information see somerset-tripscsv

100000

120000

Trip Ends per StationSomerset County

In order to see the Line of Sight Matrix with distance (in miles) between each station see

In order to see the Adjacency Matrix with a 1 indicating that the row station has a direct connection (possibly through interchanges and shape points but not through other stations) to the column station see

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

In order to see the Guideway Distance Matrix with distance of guideway (in miles) from the row station to its dierectly connected column station(s) see matrices-guidewaydistcsv

214 Financial Information

Here is a chart that shows the different profits depending on the fare charged

rights Total(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)1096$ 2470$ 1053$ 4619$ 370$ 92$ 96$ 558$ 575$ 20$ 594$ 37$

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

This shows that the $300 fare is right above the break even fare If the county would like to increase this fare they probably could due to the wealth of the population

215 Conclusion Overall parts of this county would be very good for a PRT network Other parts such as the vast areas of open land and sparsely populated areas would not prove successful But it is also likely that in these areas the population has the means of going where they need to and therefore would not use public transportation even if they could Other than those wealthy people the rest of the county would greatly benefit from a PRT network

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

Break Even FareSomerset County

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction Sussex County is located in the Northwest corner of New Jersey bordering New York and Pennsylvania and is home to an estimated 153 384 residents of New Jersey As one of the more rural counties in New Jersey the population density is comparably lower than most areas of the state The mountainous terrain has discouraged development and prevents any cohesiveness between the different towns It contains 24 municipalities and 27 school districts Sussex County Community located in Newton is the only higher education institution in Sussex County enrolling 3732 students Due to the landscape of the county agriculture and dairy farming used to be the main profession of Sussex County Although this industry has been declining there has not been a growth of businesses and commerce to replace agriculture because 60 of workers in Sussex County commute outside the county to work

Even though Sussex County is considered a ldquobedroom communityrdquo because most residents work in neighboring counties or commute to New York City there is not sufficient transportation services offered The nearest train station is located in Netcong Morris County and there are only intra-county bus lines While there are eight major highways that cross through Sussex County their original construction was restricted by the geographical characteristics of the county The Sussex County Office of Transit currently provides only 65259 rides per year (which is less than 200 rides per day) through the two county bus lines Since a significant portion of land is dedicated to forest reverses or farm plots the small clusters of suburban development are spread out It is then somewhat difficult to travel between these towns because residents must first travel to one of the few highways to then travel to their desired location41

Another interest of note is Vernon Township in the north-eastern corner of the countymdashit is home to o ski resort and water park Mountain Creek (formerly Great Gorge and Vernon Valley) the Hidden Valley ski resort as well as Crystal Springs Resorts Minerals Hotel and Elements Spa The Great Gorge Playboy Club was located in the Vernon community of McAfee but was sold and turned into a hotel now called the Legends Resort amp Country Club The township is only an hour away from New York City and also the countyrsquos largest municipality by population but with low density thus it is paramount to promote cross county transportation as a way to simulate the economy of upper Sussex County with population from its southern neighbors

41 NJ PRT Final Report 08 For More information on Sussex County please refer to previous years reports

222 Network Placemarks The Sussex Placemarks taken from last yearrsquos class were in relatively good shape with the exception of spill over place markers in the neighboring counting While deleting these markers was an option we felt as though last yearrsquos group may have put the right placemarks with the wrong gps coordinates Keeping this in minds we individually searched for these outlying place markers using google maps and changed the GPS coordinates accordingly Another thing we looked at was transportation in the county Last yearrsquos team did not have transportation place markers so we at first sought out to locate and put in these markers Open further research we realized that the only form of transportation in the county were a few Park and Ride Bus stations Given that we were implementing a PRT network we assumed that these stations would become obsolete and therefore did not service them We decided to agree with our counter parts last year and delete the placemarks thus having no transportation place markers within Sussex County

223 Network designs

The initial PRT Network will span the southernmost two municipalities of Sussex County Stanhope Township and Hopatcong Borough The success or failure of this initial network would then determine whether to continue building lines northwest further into the county As PRT service expands throughout the county it will hopefully stimulate economic development in the areas between the existing town when serviced by the PRT system to make a more evenly distributed use of the county land

Figure 191 Initial Sussex PRT Network in Stanhope NJ

Figure 192 Complete Sussex PRT Network

224 Summary Of Network Statistics Table 191 PRT Network Statistics

Sussex PRT Network Statistics

Trip Type Home Work School Recreation PT

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

Financial Networks Statistics

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total Cost of Capital

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 193 Trip Ends Served

In figure 193 above we see that the max number of trips per station was around 15000 This station is located in the city of Newton NJ which has one of the largest populations within the county

Figure 194

The Trip ends served per station in Warren County makes a lot of sensemdashall the highest trip ends served stations are located in Hackettstown and Phillipsburg while the lowest trip ends served stations are all located in the rural northwestern part of the County

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography Figure 11 Maps of Union County

Union County is located in northeastern New Jersey and consists of 10329 square miles of land Of this area approximately 206 consists of water and the remaining 9794 of land It is adjacent to the counties of Essex Hudson Richmond Middlesex Somerset and Morris all of which are also located in New Jersey Elizabeth serves as both its county seat and largest city Union is made up of 21 municipalities given below Since there is likely to be large volumes of intra-municipality travel networks are likely to serve a larger volume of trips if small individual networks cover areas in individual municipalities

Table 201 Municipalities of Union County

Fanwood Elizabeth Westfield Berkeley Heights

Garwood Linden Clark

Kenilworth Plainfield Cranford

Mountainside Rahway Hillside

New Providence Summit Scotch Plains

Roselle Park Springfield Township

Roselle Union Township

Winfield Township

A large portion of Union County is consists of low-lying and flat terrain on which construction is unproblematic and is thus conducive to the constructive of a vast PRT network There is only significant relief in its northwestern corner where the Watchung Mountains enter county territory Unionrsquos highest elevations are located here at approximately 560 feet above sea level in Berkeley Heights Meanwhile its lowest elevations which are at sea level lie along its eastern shore Union County is also home to several parks namely the Ash Brook Reservation Black Brook Park Brian Park Cedar Brook Park Echo Lake Park Elizabeth River Park Hidden Valley Park Lenape Park Madison Avenue Park Mattano Park McConnell Park Milton Lake Park Nomahagen Park Oak Ridge Park Passaic River Park Phil Rizzuto Park Rahway River Park Rahway River Parkway Tamaques Park Unami Park and Warinanco Park These have largely influenced the evolution and distribution of land uses throughout the county over the years as well as its general development Thus they are an important factor to consider in the design and planning process of a new public (PRT) transportation system

According to the 2000 US Census it has a total population of 522541 and a population density of 50732 people per square mile Specifically there are 186124 households with each one consisting of approximately 277 people on average 481 of the total population (251372) is male and the remaining 519 (271169) female The median age is 366 years In the state of New Jersey it is the county with the third largest population density being the twentieth smallest in size and simultaneously the sixth largest by population It is one of the most densely populated counties in the country overall Basic data regarding Unionrsquos demographic breakdown is given below while a more comprehensive summary can be found in the appendix of this report

Table 202 US Census Population Breakdown for Union County

18 years and over 392600 751

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

Total population 522541 1000

The fact that it is one of the most densely populated counties in America is grounds to argue that there is a financially viable market and potential for a PRT system here Unionrsquos population experienced substantial growth throughout the twentieth century Current and future population growth estimates must be taken into account in order to effectively size a new public transportation system such as PRT to an evolving demand capacity A summary of growth statistics is given below

Table 203 2000 US Census Population Breakdown for Union County

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Population Change 1990 - 2000

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Kenilworth 7675 101 13

Mountainside 6602 -55 -08

New Providence 11907 468 41

Roselle Park 13281 476 37

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Plainfield 47829 1262 27

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Westfield 29644 774 27

Berkeley Heights 13407 1427 119

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

Scotch Plains 22732 1572 74

Springfield Township 14429 1009 75

Union Township 54405 4381 88

Winfield Township 1514 -62 -39

Figure 201 Graph of Percentage Population Change of Each Municipality from 1990 - 2000

Berkeley Heights is the municipality that has exhibited the most population growth between 1990 and 2000 followed by Union Township Elizabeth Springfield Township Scotch Plains Linden and Summit In designing a new PRT system for the county continued population growth or decline must be factored into calculations to ensure the financial viability profitability and public utility of the project More stations must be placed in areas of high population density as well as growth to satisfy demand while there must be prudence in allotting stations to areas where the market may be diminishing The over-extensive development of a PRT project in such locations could amount to massive losses and may prevent the regime from being economically sustainable or feasible at all over time

Figure 202 Union County Population Breakdown by Municipality

2313 Education

The population can also be categorized by Union residentsrsquo level of education given in the table below

Population Breakdown by Educational Attainment and School Enrollment Comparison with NJ and US Overall Levels

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

A new public transportation system (PRT) would need to cater to the school trips generated by the local population Thus the distribution of schools in the county and the ridership demand that students enrolled and teachers employed alike should be a crucial consideration in designing the PRT network Following are the 10 schools in the county with the highest student enrollment

High Schools Middle Schools with the 10 Top Levels of Enrollment

School Lattitude Longitude Staff Student Enrollment

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Wilson High School 40662039 -74342742 104 2414

Washington School 40661242 -7433307 85 1925

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

Jefferson High School 40637902 -74328978 69 1456

Franklin High School 40656752 -74359928 49 1198

Thomas Edison International School 40638646 -7434163 65 1145

Roosevelt Intermediate Academy 4065157 -74354846 50 1089

Westfield Senior High 406437 -74347862 114 1051

As most schools are located within heavy residential areas they are most likely to generate the largest volume of trip attractions within a small locality such as a quarter mile radius With this in mind it seems strategically optimal to assign at least one PRT station to serve each institution

2314 Industry

Another main consideration in the design of a new public (PRT) transportation system is the ridership volumes generated by work-related trips Depending on the nature of the industry at a place of work there may be a large volume of visitor trips generated (for instance at retail institutions or banks) or of multiple trips by employees to and from the office This must be taken into account when assessing the potential trip capacity generated at each location Union County specializes in the retail pharmaceuticals petroleum and telecommunications fields Other prevailing local industries are summarized in the following table

Industries in Union County Industry No of Establishments No of Paid Employees

Manufacturing 884 35230

Wholesale trade 1048 21079

Retail trade 2135 25142

Information 198 4510

Real estate amp rental amp leasing 616 3195

Professional scientific amp technical services 1668 20940

Administrative amp support amp waste management amp remediation service 787 21699

Educational services 115 1008

Health care amp social assistance 1448 27752

Arts entertainment amp recreation 140 2497

Accommodation amp food services 995 11325

Other services (except public administration) 1160 6898

More specifically the places of work with the 10 largest levels of employment and those that on average attract the largest number of visitors (defined as an individual with no obligation to travel to a destination in question regularly or at all) are given as follows

Employers with the 10 Largest Numbers of Employees

Employer Latitude Longitude Staff Visitors

Jersey Gardens Outlet Mall 40660587 -74169796 681 5430

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Lucent Technologies 40662683 -74215032 243 130

Union Government Buildings 40678455 -74196747 183 1200

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

Cranford Police Athletic League In 40671702 -74293695 86 300

Elizabeth Postal Empl Credit Union 40650602 -74180434 86 478

Evergard Steel Corp 40647399 -74233274 84 95

Blake Industries Inc 40658758 -7437669 84 150

Employers that Attract the 10 Largest Numbers of Visitors

Wal-Mart Stores Inc 40614018 -74254909 54 2300

Marshalls of Ma Inc 40627947 -7430534 49 2140

Moshells Discount Department Store 40619356 -74423146 38 1930

Mens Wearhouse Inc 40690135 -74299368 35 1730

Schering Plough HealthCare Products 40728679 -74376027 49 1690

PJ Kennedy and Sons 40698119 -74403968 25 1400

Medical Diagnostic Associates 40695219 -74326863 84 1380

Linden Medical Associates 40627763 -74245851 82 1320

Ramco Equipment Corp 40704225 -74235934 23 1290

Sandina Food Sales Inc 40689352 -74305864 19 1240

As with the educational institutions it seems only logical that places of work with the highest numbers of employees andor those that attract the largest number of visitors will generate the largest trip volumes (especially attractions) Therefore individual PRT stations should be situated in the immediate vicinity of these locations

In the financial respect according to the 2000 US Census Union County is the ninety-third highest income county in the US and has the seventy-fourth highest personal per-capita income As of 2008 per capita income is $26992 and the median household income is $67127 Meanwhile 88 of the county as a whole earn below the poverty level The general affluence of each locality must be taken into account for two main reasons

i While the PRT project aims to minimize the user cost (per ride fare) of the system and maintain the level at a low that is competitive or possibly even better than that offered by existing forms of (public) transportation before establishing the system we must ensure that it is affordable to the targeted users in the area given their income level

ii The affluence of a community dictates the degree of taxation that will be collected and can be used towards the funding of the PRT project

2315 Recreation

Major landmarks or attractions within Union County will undoubtedly be large trip generators and thus must be closely considered in the PRT planning or network design process The countyrsquos main attractions are Port Elizabeth (which is the largest container cargo port on the east coast) the Watchung Reservation and Stable (consisting of 2065 acres of woodland frequented by recreators) and the Jersey Gardens Outlet Malls (which is the largest in all of New Jersey) These will likely merit multiple stations in their nearby vicinity to anticipate the large volumes of trips to be served during peak hours days or seasons

Other notable attractions include

i Plainfield Country Club ndash Plainfield NJ ii Scotch Hills Golf and Country Club ndash Scotch Plains NJ iii Reeves-Reed Arboretum ndash Summit NJ iv Galloping Hill Golf Course ndash Kenilworth NJ v Trailside Nature and Science Center ndash Mountainside NJ vi Union Arts Center ndash Rahway NJ vii Bowcraft Amusement Park ndash Scotch Plains NJ viii Twin Brooks Country Clib ndash Watchung NJ

Union County is already host to a relatively extensive transportation network Its road system consists of the following major routes

bull US Route 22 bull NJ Route 28 bull County Route 577 bull NJ Route 124 bull NJ Route 24 bull NJ Turnpike

bull County Route 509 509 Spur bull County Route 512 bull Garden State Parkway bull NJ Route 439 bull NJ Route 59 bull NJ Route 27

bull County Route 514 bull County Route 527 bull County Route 531 bull NJ Route 81 bull NJ Route 82 bull US Route 1 19

Figure 110 Map of Major Routes in Union County

A proposed PRT system should take advantage of the existing road networks which already consist of relatively efficient paths that interconnect the different municipalities of the county maximizing the accessibility of different county attractions densely populated (popular) areas as well as the physical geography of the land Constructing the PRT guideway along existing roads would also help save space (surface area) occupied by public transportation systems and networks thereby minimizing the intrusion and opportunity cost of land use incurred by this endeavor

Intra-county (and out-of-county-bound) trips are also feasible using the NJ Transit (railway) system via the following stations

bull Cranford bull Garwood bull Netherwood bull Rahway bull Union bull Berkeley Heights

bull Elizabeth bull Linden bull North Elizabeth bull Roselle Park bull Westfield

bull Fanwood bull Murray Hill bull Plainfield bull Summit bull New Providence

Figure 111 Map of NJ Transit Stations in Union County

Figure 203 Map of NJ Transit Network

The Gladstone Branch which is largely present in Union County as seen in the above maps is an extension of NJ Transits Morris and Essex lines and is predominantly used by commuter trains The line proceeds to Secaucus Junction New York Penn Station and Hoboken Terminal but with transfers at Newark Broad Street or Summit can be used to reach other destinations The considerable NJ transit coverage within the county allows Union residents to reach New York (both Manhattan and further upstate) other counties of New Jersey and Philadelphia It allows for regular commuter trips to these areas especially for the purposes of work and recreation Thus over the course of the NJ Transitrsquos development it has multiplied Union Countyrsquos potential capacity for trip generation especially for trip production generation by increasing the mobility of its users and visitors

The proposed PRT system is not designed to compete or replace this system but to complement it Thus PRT guideways should not run parallel to these existing systems In addition PRT terminals should be placed nearby or directly at NJ Transit Stations to provide a more efficient alternative to walking (and in some cases even driving) thereby cutting down travel time and to increase the accessibility of the NJ Transit System as a whole from different regions of the county not just those that lie along its network paths Below is the 2009 NJ Transit ridership data that specifies the average weekday passenger boardings at each station in Union county and thus also represents the average number of trip attractions to each of these stations that must be catered to by the proposed PRT system

2009 NJ Transit Ridership Data

Station 2009 Average Weekday Passenger Boardings

NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LINE

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

MORRISTOWN LINE (MORRIS AND ESSEX)

Summit 3642

GLADSTONE BRANCH (MORRIS AND ESSEX)

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Berkeley Heights 511

Total 24676

Further Union County has a bus network which is also run by the New Jersey Transit authorities However these will not be detailed since given that one of the proposed PRT networkrsquos objectives is to serve at least 90 of trips currently served by automobiles or buses in the county it will be an effective competitor with this established mode Nevertheless presumably in the gradual development of the bus system different stations were placed to serve demand and thus to maximize accessibility and served demand ndash the same objectives that the PRT stations hope to achieve Thus in the planning and design process of the PRT system the countyrsquos bus system data will be useful in determining optimal locations for PRT terminals

2321 Potential Benefits As of the 2000 Census average travel time to work in Union County is approximately 287 minutes ndash instituting a PRT system could potentially reduce this even more There are several reasons why the development of PRT in this region is a both viable and beneficial idea

i Given the countyrsquos large population and relatively small area the PRT network would serve as a fast form of public transport that would reduce intra-county travel times and increase ease of access It would eliminate the hassle and time wastage of finding somewhere to park or waiting in traffic when traveling by automobile (and bus) while also

saving travel time compared to what a light rail system would achieve since it does not require passengers to stop at each station en route to their destination

ii An extensive network would increase county-wide accessibility which can help enrich and strengthen its economy

iii By providing an alternative to automobile or bus transit congestion on roads will be relieved and thus further reducing average travel time and raising public utility This would have the side effect of decreasing gasoline consumption giving rise to environmental benefits

2322 Objectives

The main objectives of the PRT system would be to

i Be able to cater to at least 90 of the trips currently served by automobile or bus transit within the county ii Increase accessibility to existing mass transit systems such as the NJ Transit Railway System and thus indirectly

increase ridership and reduce the costs of individualized (ie automobile) travel (congestion air pollution excess consumption of gasoline etc)

iii Consist of stations that are accessible to most of the county via at most a quarter of a mile walk iv Generally increase the efficiency of travel within the county

233 Methodology

2331 INCORPORATING AND REVIEWING DATA

With the above stated objectives in mind first of all existing land use and public transit infrastructure in Union County was researched and studied extensively Work completed by previous students on the proposal of PRT in several counties was then reviewed to identify possible points that needed improvement or further development

The csv file containing the placemarks for all the recorded locations (including US Census housing blocks educational institutions places of work places of recreation and mass transit stations) were then audited

i Each data point was reviewed to ensure that the values detailing the number of residents student enrollment and number of employees at each location were of reasonable accuracy and were updated as well as that estimates for the number of visitors on an average weekday were too reasonable Considering that the visitor volumes at most locations especially at stores or office places are not commonly recorded statistics the best possible model used such estimates If visitor volumes were stricken from calculations due to lack of perfect information and simply not taken into consideration trip generation estimates would likely be grossly understated which could lead to a poorly planned PRT network with insufficient accessibility andor capacity

ii Significant locations that had been omitted in the previous files were also added to allow the planning process to be more thorough Specifically some train stations schools and large places of employment were added

iii Since more recent census data has yet to be released the previous US 2000 Housing Census data was used as the counter checkpoint for the residential blocks recorded in the csv file

2332 DESIGNING THE PRT NETWORK

First of all stations were placed beside or nearby placemarks that warranted their own terminal specifically schools existing mass transit stations and major recreation points If more than one placemark was located within the same quarter mile radius from a station then adding multiple stations was sometimes omitted for cost-minimizing purposes so long as the number of trips allocated to the station was not phenomenally large Conversely for placemarks that anticipate massive ridership surges especially during peak hours or seasons such as stadiums or outlet malls multiple stations were sometimes assigned

After situating stations nearby all such lsquomajorrsquo placemarks additional stations were laid down in areas for which the program indicated high trip generation demand while simultaneously attempting to lsquocoverrsquo a maximal area of the county (maximize system accessibility) Thus the remainder of the station-placing process consisted of lsquoeye-ballingrsquo optimal locations The locations of current commuter bus and parkampride stations were frequently also selected as locations for PRT terminals since it caters to the same ridership population Images of stations being placed according to these criteria is shown below to illustrate this process

Figure 204 Images of the Station-Placing Process

After a sufficient level of network coverage and ridership were achieved guideways and interchanges were placed to begin linking the stations and establishing the network Because intra-municipality trips are likely to be more frequent than out-of-municipality trips as stipulated by the gravity model individual smaller networks were built to connect stations within the same municipality or community as an initial step Guideways were situated along existing road systems in order to take advantage of the already efficient network as well as to prevent the consumption of more space (land surface area) for the purpose of public transportation Thus the road system served as a skeleton framework for the PRT network As basic guidelines due to physical (size) construction constraints and to maximize the efficiency of the PRT network (ensuring that traffic can travel at constant velocity along the guideways at all times is feasible) the guideways are one-directional each station can only accommodate 2 guideways and each interchange can accommodate a maximum of 4 guideways Thus if a station was desired to serve 2 directions then it was modeled as 2 stations with each one serving one direction

After creating individual networks to cater to each municipality or small community these were combined using interchanges to complete the county-wide network For easersquos sake the individual networks for adjacent municipalities and communities were designed successively then connected to allow for logical fluidity and cohesion in the network as a whole This made it easier for example to ensure that guideways situated along major routes were going in the same direction between networks and therefore to ensure that there are continuous relatively linear paths when travelling from one municipality to another along a major route

Figure 205 A Small Network in Berkeley Heights Union County

To allow the stations to be effectively lsquoofflinersquo as PRT theoretically should be an interchange was assigned to each one As a result each station was designed as an offshoot or branch of the corresponding interchange allowing travelers to completely bypass all other stations along the way to their destination and thus to arrive there faster Each interchange that was paired with a station thus had 4 arcs 1 incoming from the rest of the network 1 outgoing to the rest of the network 1 outgoing to the corresponding station and 1 incoming from the same station An example of this setup can be seen in the figure below

Figure 206 Offline Stations and Linked Interchanges

In effect interchanges were used as portals between each corresponding station and the rest of the network Using interchanges in this manner had two main strategic implications there were at least the same number of interchanges as there are stations and the entire PRT system is essentially a skeleton grid-like network of interconnecting interchanges with stations branching off Thus the linked series of interchanges (or node-interchange network) serve as an equivalent of

what a highway system is to automobile travel This method also made it easier to link stations that were situated in areas that were not nearby or easily reachable via major routes One disadvantage however is that it involves the use of a greater length of guideway which will thus translate into higher costs and potentially greater barriers in project financing

The lsquobig-picturersquo strategy in designing the network as a whole was to establish a grid system similar to that of New York City to tackle the constraint of one-dimensional paths Not only does this minimize non-linear additional travel time as a result of the one-directional nature of PRT travel but it prevents PRT users from lsquobacktrackingrsquo or going out of their way (traveling in large loops) before beginning to travel in the correct direction towards their destination There is greater ability for PRT vehicles to change direction faster and in a more efficient manner Thus the grid system minimizes total travel distance and time allowing PRT trips to be more linear and anchoring the efficiency of the system Once at an interchange the PRT vehicle will travel in a loop until it reaches an appropriate exit to travel in the desired direction Meanwhile following the example set by major roads (such as US routes or NJ routes) that often completely bisect the county such main routes were used as the basis for lsquomain guidewaysrsquo which travel in the same direction throughout the entire network and serve as the basic framework for the PRT systemrsquos grid structure In order to achieve this configuration adjacentconsecutive loops travelling in alternating directions were designed

When loops were deemed too large especially if there were multiple stations along one guideway segment in a loop the loop was bisected to shorten the travel path for users that need to change direction as well as to ease traffic demand along busy guideway segments (those with stations located along the same path) Such bisections account for the fact that there are occasionally parallel guideways travelling in the same direction

It must be noted however that this was also often the product of the physical limitations or contour of the road system (on which the PRT network was based) ndash for example in building components of the network that are along bodies of water (or the edge of land) it is only possible to travel in one direction without overly complicating the bordering guideway segmentrsquos structure An image of the PRT grid network in the process of its creation and development is given below

Figure 207 The Grid Network in the Process of Development

To minimize the additional distance to be travelled to reach a destination as a result of the circular nature of PRT travel and resultantly allow the grid system to be implemented effectively ideally there would be an interchange after each station to allow travelers to almost immediately begin travelling in the appropriate direction However depending on the existing road system on which the PRT network is based this was not always possible Thus there are loops whose edges each host more than one station

In connecting several networks rotunda-like loops consisting solely of interchanges were designed to serve as major interfaces for longer distance PRT travel for instance between different municipalities (or the smaller networks that were designed individually) These clusters of interchanges were strategically situated so that once a PRT vehicle reaches such a lsquorotundarsquo it is virtually immediately able to go in any direction from there Most of the time they were placed at the junction or intersection of multiple major routes An example is shown below

Figure 208 A Rotunda Made of Interchanges or Network Interface

It would be foolish and infeasible to fully construct a network as large as that proposed above especially given the extent of its projected tripridership coverage In order for this project of such scope to be financially feasible it must start recovering costs of construction as soon as possible In addition because PRT is a completely new mode of transportation before establishing a network of such large scale smaller individual networks should be created and tested for ridership popularity and extent of market captivity As a result it was deemed that a 20-year phase-by-phase growth plan be implemented This is detailed below

2341 Phase I Year 0 to Year 5

bull Construct initial PRT networks in the densest municipalities of Union County so as to maximize the number of trips served per square mile to establish a strong initial footing in the market as well as revenue from ticketing This will help capture ridership market share from the competing modes of automobile and bus travel These pilot municipalities of the network include Elizabeth Linden Rahway Summit and Plainfield ndash all cities These networks are to initially solely serve individual municipalities (intra-municipal trips) of which a larger volume is more likely to be generated due to distance disutility according to the Gravity model

bull These initial networks will amount to 139 stations in total 8624 miles of guideway and 241 interchanges

Figure 2010 Phase I Development Elizabeth Network Figure 2011 Phase II Development Connecting Rahway and Linden

2342 Phase II Year 5 to Year 10

bull The initial networks constructed during phase I will launch operation at the beginning of this phase bull Connect the individual networks of Elizabeth Linden and Rahway which are all located in the south-eastern

region of the county In the process of so doing construct connecting networks in the surrounding or nearby municipalities including Roselle Roselle Park and Clark

bull Establish individual PRT networks in areas of medium density including Garwood Cranford Union Berkeley Heights Watchung and Fanwood These are all relatively major commuter areas thus the system would benefit workers who live and work in different municipalities at the completion of this phase Since the majority of already established networks are located in the south-east it would be strategic to simply continue expanding in a north-westward direction so that the system grows in a cohesive manner

bull Phase II also serves as the trial period for the phase I system of the PRT network If the initial system is unable to capture sufficient ridership and effectively compete with automobilebus travel in the large cities covered by phase I then it is unlikely to succeed on a larger scale when expanded to less densely populated areas with less trip generation Thus the completion of phase II will be contingent upon the success of the projectrsquos phase I component

bull Expansion is significantly more rapid in phase II than in phase I because its completion is contingent upon the success of the initial networks If the phase I components prove to be profitable attracting high ridership away from intra-municipal automobile and bus travel then such rapid expansion is justifiable since there is evidence that the long term viability of the system shows promise

bull By the end of this phase there will be a total of 381 stations 20179 miles of guideway and 684 interchanges in the overall Union County network

2343 Phase III Year 10 to Year 15

bull By the end of this phase individual networks should be established in all of Union Countyrsquos municipalities to at least capture the entire intra-municipal travel market Thus networks should be established in municipalities including Mountainside Scotch Plains New Providence and Chatham Most clusters of adjacent networks should be combined to increase the mobility offered at each of the already covered counties

bull By the end of this phase there will be a total of 587 stations 34253 miles of guideway and 954 interchanges Almost all stations should be established by the end of this phase since each municipality should already be covered by a network

2344 Phase IV Year 15 to Year 20

bull Complete the PRT network by laying down stations in less densely populated areas or smaller communities as well as ensuring that all individual networks are somehow interconnected

bull Establish a lsquohighwayrsquo of interchanges to provide a more linear path for PRT travel from one end of the county to the other without bypassing more intricate aspects of the overall network These are thus able to directly connect individual municipality networks that are farther away from one another The establishment of such interchange highways and the focus of network connection during this phase is why there is a substantial increase in the length of guideway added since phase III especially relative to the number of additional stations created

bull By the end of this phase the proposed PRT network will be completed and will consist of 604 stations 42408 miles of guideway and 1024 interchanges

bull Planning authorities should begin considering connecting inter-county PRT networks particularly those in neighboring Hudson and Essex to further expand network coverage

Table 205 Evolution

Phase Year(s) No of Stations Miles of Guideway No of Interchanges I 0-5 139 8624 241 II 5-10 381 20179 684 III 10-15 587 34253 954

235 Trip Analysis Statistics The final Union County PRT Network consists of 604 stations 1024 interchanges and 42408 miles of guideway Of the 13008 placemarks recorded in the countyrsquos csv file 12270 of them are assigned to stations and thus are located within a quarter mile radius to at least one PRT station This translates into 9432 functional coverage of Union County by the PRT network and service to 9616 of all trips generated that are currently served by automobile andor bus transit systems

Trip Type Potential Number of Trips (Daily)

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Figure 2013 Phase III Network in sparsely populated New Providence

Figure 2012 Phase IV Establishing Interchange Highways

Figure 2014 Individual Station Trip End Service Rates

Figure 2015 Trip Ends Served by Each Station in Descending Order

Figure 2016 Trips Served by Each Station in Descending Order

236 Network Financial Analysis The different components of the PRT networkrsquos construction incur the following total costs

Table 207 Fixed Costs of Union County PRT System

Component Unit Cost ($ mn) Number of Units Required Total Cost

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

Interchange Assumed costless in this study 1024 $000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

In order to finance this large project we propose that the combined efforts of Union Countyrsquos municipalities float 30-year zero-coupon revenue (municipal) bonds worth of the entire projected cost ($1336930000000) that are to be repaid directly using earnings from the PRT network Thus all revenue earned by the PRT system rom year 0 to year 20 (in its first 15 years of operation) will be devoted to the repayment of these bonds at year 20 maturity In order to determine appropriate unit PRT ride pricing an estimate for the total number of trips per year must be generated From the productions and attractions computed by the csv datasets it was determined that Union County generates a potential of 3132577 trips per average weekday Given the PRT network design that functionally covers only 943 of Unionrsquos total area the system is expected to serve an average of 3012265 trips per day This value can be used as an estimate for the number of trips served by the system each of the 260 weekdays that there are per year on average

Estimates for the number of trips served by the system during weekends were also needed to find the optimal PRT trip price NJ Transit 2009 Ridership data was used to find percentage fluctuations in ridership during weekends relative to average weekday levels This information was deemed as sufficiently comprehensive grounds to base such proportion calculations on since they encompass bus rail light rail demand response and van pool modes of transportation simultaneously The percentage fluctuations were calculated by normalizing the average weekday ridership level to 1 or 100

Table 208 NJ Transit 2009 Ridership Data

Average Total Ridership Percentage of Average Weekday Ridership

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Saturday 433801 4557

Sunday 286494 3010

Thus we can estimate that the number of trips generated and served by the PRT network will be about 4557 of average weekday ridership on Saturdays and about 3010 of average weekday ridership on Sundays Using this assumption we can deduce the following equation

Average Trips Per Year = 260 weekdaysyear times 3012265 average tripsweekday( )

+ 1052

saturdaysyear times 4557of average weekday ridership times 3012265 average tripsweekday

+ 1052

sundaysyear times 3010of average weekday ridership times 3012265 average tripsweekday

= 1566377800 weekday tripsyear +144132362 saturday tripsyear + 952026353 sunday tripsyear = 90285639860 tripsyear

The gradual growth and development of the PRT system must be taken into account before any financial calculations can be made The following table shows a detailed schedule of fixed costs associated with the evolution of Unionrsquos network

Table 209 Schedule of Union County PRT Projected Capital Costs

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

PHASE I YEAR 5 1543469 trips served per average weekday

PHASE II YEAR 10 1954208 trips served per average weekday

PHASE III YEAR 15 2845243 trips served per average weekday

PHASE IV YEAR 20 3012265 trips served per average weekday

Table 2010 Union County PRT Projected Trip Statistics and Capital Costs

Since the PRT system will only begin to be operational and serve trips beginning year 5 in effect the NJ PRT authorities would only have 15 years (between years 5 and 20) to recover the total cost to pay out the $1336930000000 worth of municipal bonds used to finance the project by their maturity date in year 20

Assuming the successful penetration of current automobile and bus ridership markets and that projected trip estimates hold accurate by year 20 a total of 5 x (4266189471+58572841270+85279543740+90285639860) = 9505713986 trips would have been served This translates into a unit trip price of $141 that is required for the county to break even precisely by year 20 (maturity)

Assuming this trip unit price an average resident of Union County traveling 4 times a day would spend $564 per day on transportation and an estimate of $205860 per year In comparison the median cost of a new car is currently at $25500

which translates into an average annual cost of $318750 given that the average life time of a new car is about 8 years according to MSNBC Dividing this figure by 365 days the average daily cost of car usage is $873 and given that the average number of trips per person per day is approximately 4 this translates into a cost of $218 per trip It must be noted that the calculation of these statistics still exclude the complementary required costs of fuel taxation insurance maintenance and repairs thus in reality are likely to be even higher on average As an additional point of comparison the cost of a one-way trip on a NJ Transit bus is on average $175 statewide This considered the proposed PRT network offers extremely competitive pricing and is accessible to a wider range of socio-economic classes Thus it is a proposal with large potential for growth and success

Though it must be noted that the these calculations do not yet take into consideration the additional annual recurring costs of maintenance repairs operations and the cost of capital the proposed idea is already supported by a feasible finance plan and offers competitively low rates for an efficient mode of transportation with high accessibility Further the fact that the proposed unit cost of a ticket of $141 is markedly lower than the unit (one trip) cost of its 2 main competing modes of transportation $175 (the NJ Transit bus system) and $218 (average automobile trip) this proposed price can still be increased to any level up to $175 without affecting the size of PRTrsquos potential captive market Thus hypothetically speaking a $033 increase to a unit PRT ride price of $174 would amount to an additional $033 x 9505713986 trips = $313688561500 over the course of the systemrsquos first 20 years of existence (or 15 years of operation) This translates into $15684428080 revenue per year Such projected additional revenue not used to payout the municipal bonds can be used towards other costs incurred by the system especially its recurring annual costs or can also serve as a margin of safety in the event that there is insufficient ridership to raise the projectedrequired amount for the bond payouts

To investigate this more closely a schedule of annual recurring costs must be established to determine the amount of money besides the initial cost of construction or establishment of the system that the PRT network authorities will need to earn in order to at least break even and maximize its profits The annual recurring costs include

i Cost of Capital The cost of capital (interest on the municipal bonds) is taken as 8 in total - the same rate specified by the Transportation Bond Act of 2005 This yields an annualized rate of 04 As a result the annual cost of capital will be 04 x $1336930000000 = $5247720000 This cost will be incurred from year 0 when the bonds are initially floated until year 20 when the principal is scheduled to be paid out

ii Maintenance and Repairs According to the NJ Transit Authorities annual expenses attributable to maintenance and repairs for their rail and light rail systems amount to approximately 004 of its initial capital costs on average Using this value the annual maintenance and repair cost will be 004 x $1336930000000 = $534772000 However because our proposal plans for the gradual growth and development of the entire network we projected a gradual progression of such costs we estimated that maintenance and repairs will only call for 001 of initial capital costs at the birth of the systemrsquos operations (from year 5 to 9) when only a small proportion of the entire network is in operation then increase to 002 (from year 10 to 14) once trip volumes served are expected to substantially increase and the network has further grown then to 003 (from year 15 to 19) when there is again some expansion and finally to 004 (the long-term average annual maintenancerepair cost) when the entire system has been constructed and is fully operational This means that from year 5 to 9 such costs will amount to $133693000 annually $267386000 annually from year 10 to 14 and $401079000 from year 15 to 19 It must also be noted that maintenancerepair costs only begin to take effect on year 5 as this is when the system is planned to open ndash and thus when the system is susceptible to wear and tear or damage

iii Operating Costs This pertains to variable costs such as payments for electricity staffing (monitoring and maintenance) and the use of other utilities (such as waterplumbing for public restrooms or telecommunications for staff communication to facilitate PRT system monitoring) Based on figures declared by the NJ Transit

Authorities operating costs are approximately always double maintenance and repair costs Thus the long term average annual operating cost will be $534772000 x 2 = $1069544000 and the gradual progression of the annual operating cost will be directly proportional to that of the maintenance and repairs cost

The costs can be more accurately summarized by the following table

Table 2011 Schedule of Annual Recurring Costs

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

Since revenue from ticket sales until year 20 are solely allotted to and saved for the (re)payment of the bondsrsquo principal at maturity only revenue from such sources as station-naming rights royalties and in-pod advertising will contribute to footing these annual recurring costs According the NJ Transit Authorities an average in-state railway station collects approximately $5000 of revenue from such sources on a monthly basis This figure will be used to estimate non-project finance revenues (revenue collected that does not contribute towards the repayment of the bondsrsquo principal at maturity) Since according to the proposal the entire initial cost of constructing the network should be recovered by year 20 beginning this time period ticketing revenue will too entirely contribute to non-project finance revenues Because of the gradual development of PRT system annual non-project finance earnings will be as follows Phase I 139 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $000 Phase II 381 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $834000000

Phase III 587 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $2286900000 Phase IV 604 stations x $5000month x 12 months = $3522000000 Long Term (604 stations x $5000month x 12 months) + ($141trip x 90285639860 tripsyear) = $101132491048 Thus the profitability of the project over time can be summarized by the following table and chart Table 2012 Projected Profitability

Phase Year(s) Annual Recurring Costs Annual Non-Project Finance Earnings PnL

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

241 Introduction Warren County is located in the northwestern region of New Jersey It occupies an area of 365 square miles and takes the shape of a Dr Seuss sock Of those 365 square miles 358 square miles is land and 5 square miles is water (wiki) It ranks ninth in size among the statersquos twenty-one counties but only 19th in population with a 2000 estimated population of 102437 The population density for the county is 268 people per square mile Within the county there are 38660 households and 27487 families The county consists of some of the most undeveloped rugged terrain in New Jersey due to the Kittatinny Ridge Over 50 of the county is undeveloped woodland and wetlands comprise another 25 Warren County land use is primarily agricultural with four small urban areas These urban centers are Hackettstown Belvedere Phillipsburg and Washington Township

242 Placemarks

The Warren Placemarks had a lot of spillovers into the neighboring counties as such we had to remove all the place marks that look outside of our county boundary A suggestion for next semester would be to implement a County Border option so that we can effectively delete out of county place marks Another problem with the Warren County placemark was the lack of students going to schools which we had to manually input Lastly there exist no places for recreation in Warren County according to the placemarks which simply canrsquot be true However due to the lack of time those were the only

modifications we were able make thus we suggest next yearrsquos team to rigorously sort through the placemark file of this county 243 Network design

Due to the spread out nature of the population which is evidenced by the low population density of 268 people per square mile the PRT network was designed to both serve a majority of the county as well as remain economically sound In order to do so the minimum number of trips for a station was determined to be 1000 Although this may seem to be a relatively low minimum in comparison to the PRT networks designed for other counties in New Jersey it is ideal for Warren County due to both the relatively low number of people residing in the county and the relatively large amount of area that the county covers

The initial PRT network was built around the Township of Phillipsburg the largest urban center in Warren County located on the southwestern tip of Warren County As of the census of 2000 there were 15166 people 6044 households and 3946 families residing in the town The population density was 47036 people per square mile Situated at the confluence of the Delaware and Lehigh rivers the city once benefited from being a major transportation hub serving as the western terminus of the Morris Canal as well as serving 5 major railroads However today the town has fallen on hard times with median income for a household at just $37368 per year and the median income for a family at just $46925 as of the 2000 Census In 1994 the New Jersey Legislature designated Phillipsburg as an Urban Enterprise Zone offering businesses special tax incentives and other benefits to be based in the town With these conditions it seems Phillipsburg would be an ideal place to start a PRT network as a cheap and efficient way to get more people into the city center and revive the economy of Philipsburg

Figure 211 Initial PRT Network in PhillipsburgNJ

Two NJ Transit bus services which transport people from Pohatcong Plaza in Warrant County along Route 22 to Easton in Pennsylvania goes through Philipsburg The two bus services (Route 890 and 891) hits all the major attractions off of Route 22 in Philipsburg including the Philipsburg shopping mall Warren Hospital etc (httpwwwnjtransitcompdfbusT1890pdf) Thus most of our initial PRT system will be perpendicular to Route 22 for this express purpose

Figure 212 Complete Warren County PRT

244 Summary of Network Statistics

Warren PRT Network Statistics

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Stations Interchanges Guideway

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

() (miles) (per day)

(per day)

(per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicle)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

247 Combined Tri-Network

The networks of Warren Sussex and Hunterdon combined

Figure 214 (Combined PRT Network for the Three Counties)

Table 214 Tri-County Network Statistics

Tri-County PRT Network Statistics

Trip Type Home Work School Recreation PT Total

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Financial Networks Statistics Tri- County

Stations Interchang

es Guideway Tot trip

Trips Fleet size Avg trip

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

() () (miles) (per day) (per day) (per day) () (Miles) (Tripsvehicl

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

As noted by these network statistics by combining all three counties into one large PRT network we were able to maximize the total percentage of trips served By doing this we can achieve a breakeven PampL by $341 rather than way later as is the case in both Warren and Sussex

Table 215 Tri-County Costs and Revenues

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Basic Costs Revenue Tri- County

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Trip ends served per stationWarren Hunterdon Sussex Combined

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

PampL with Change in Fares

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

2471 Comparison Between Dijkstra and Line Of Sight

The tables below show the 5 largest distances between two stations using the Line of Sight measure and the Shortest Path measure of our network obtained using Matlab

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

Station 1 Station 2 Dijkstra Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

We can see from the above that the max cost from one station to another is larger but this is to be expected If the objective were to find a network with cost relatively close to the Line of Sight Cost then it would be necessary to implement more two-way guideways Interesting however if we were to look at the county in which each of these stations was located we would see that all the station 1 stations listed above are in south-west portion of Hunterdon and all the station 2 stations listed are in north-east portion of Sussex This result makes sense given that the north-east portion of Sussex and the South-West portion of Hunterdon are on the complete opposite side of the network Therfore though our network is clearly not as good as a two-way guide way network the results of the Dijkstrarsquos shortest path cost are consistent with those of the Line of Sight from a geographical point of view

Line Of Sight Distance

Station 1 Station 2 LoS Distance

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

i httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434007html ii httpwwwthetransportpoliticcomwp-contentuploads200905south-jersey12png iii httpwwwridepatcoorg iv httpquickfactscensusgovqfdstates3434007html httppolicyrutgerseduvtcdocumentsLandUsecamden_growthpdf

1 Executive Summary

11 What is Personal Rapid Transit

What is the history of PRT

13 What are the benefits of PRT

14 What might a PRT network in New Jersey look like


21 Fundamentals of Personal Rapid Transit Technology

22 Recent Developments in PRT Technology

221 Case Study Heathrow Airport Terminal 5

222 Case Study City of Masdar Abu Dhabi


23 Summary Data

3 Programming Team Report

31 User Interface Enhancements



4 Atlantic County

41 Atlantic County and its PRT Needs


43 Data Collection

44 Network Design Process

45 The NJ Transit-PRT System




5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network

53 Construction Evolution

54 Final Network

55 Coverage Analysis


57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County

61 Geography and Demographics

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability

Expansion and Development

67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network

84 Construction Plan Evolution

85 Summer Statistics

9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics

92 PRT Network in Cumberland

93 PRT SummaryBelow are the summary statistics for Cumberland County

10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry



107 Trip Analysis Statistics



11 Gloucester County

111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data


164 Building the Rest of the Network


166 Ridership Information

167 Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm (section written together with Caroline)


17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data


184 Network Statistics

185 Network Financials

186 Dijkstrarsquos Algorithm (section written together with Julio)

19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data

193 PRT Network Proposal

194 Network Evolution

195 Conclusion

20 Salem County

201 Demographic Summary


203 Economic Summary

204 Education Summary

205 Transportation Summary

206 PRT Network

207 Years Built

208 PRT Network Summary

209 Notes for future networks

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation



2321 Potential Benefits

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology









236 Network Financial Analysis

24 Warren County


245 Summary Of Financial Statistics


Project Contributors

Atlantic County Anna Zhao Bergen County Sida Huang Burlington County Taylor Stewart-Cannon Camden County Alexandre Faust Cape May Felicia Yau Cumberland County Jonathan Erlichman Kexin Christina Ren Essex County Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Gloucester County Jonathan Erlichman Kexing Christina Ren Hudson County Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Hunterdon County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Mercer County James Connolly Middlesex County Juan Mazzini Monmouth County Julio Fredes Caroline Logue Morris County Ican Kleinfeld Ocean County Caroline Logue Julio Fredes Passaic County Hillary Ford Salem County Jonathan Erlichman Kexing Christina Ren Somerset County Thomas Wells Sussex County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Union County Ma Claudine Fernandez Brandon Reyes Warren County Dao Mi Matthew Douglas Programming Team John Valentino Ethan Goldstein Nathan

Keyes Justin Fu Leadership Team Talal Mufti Michael Yaroshefsky

Contents

5 Bergen County 31

7 Camden County 53

10 Essex County 0

12 Hudson County 31

14 Mercer County 52

18 Ocean County 124

20 Salem County 160

23 Union County 190

1 Executive Summary

4 Atlantic County

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 18

419 miles

433 interchanges

Total Trips

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

$573 $143 $401 $1117

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Figure 21

Figure 22

54 Final Network

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

6 Burlington County

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

Southern Network

64 Eastern Network

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

County Total Trip

Figure 36

The Final Network

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 310

Figure 311

Employment Stations

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

7 Camden County

8 Cape May County

in New Jersey

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 52 Costs

Wildwood Area

After Wildwood

Age Breakdown

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Cumberland County

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

Table 63 Evolution

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

Orange Park Orange

Verona Park Verona

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Newark 278154 20528

Orange 31058 8123

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

Verona 12937 3023

Fairfield 7707 2106

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex County NJ US

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

School Location

104 Industry

Employer Location

Verizon Newark NJ

Newark NJ

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Projected PnL

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Gloucester County

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Education

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

timestimes

timestimes+

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

13 Hunterdon County

133 Network Design

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

Figure 103

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

1423 Rural

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Total 2145088 2353841 911

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

Population 364883

Total Stations 491

1431 Entire Network

145 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

Table 117 Evolution

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

152 Initial Network

1531 Quick Overview

1542 Suburban

1543 Rural

155 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

1551 Judgement

1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

business

network

included

stations in year 2

Table 131 Evolution

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

Monmouth

Station 150

(below)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

newcost = cost

for i = 150

d = sort(E)

ratio = costLoS

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

ratMax = zeros(31)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1340 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

175 Final Network

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

fewer stations

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

Average Fare Paid 3

19 Passaic County

Trip ends served

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

4456114

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Stations Guidewa

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

Salem County

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

100000

120000

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

22 Sussex County

223 Network designs

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 194

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

Winfield Township

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

2313 Education

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

2314 Industry

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

2315 Recreation

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

Summit 3642

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Total 24676

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology

Table 205 Evolution

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Sunday 286494 3010

+ 1052

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

242 Placemarks

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

(per day)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Stations Interchang

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

1 Executive Summary











23 Summary Data





4 Atlantic County



43 Data Collection






5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network


54 Final Network



57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County


62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability


67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network



9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics



10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry







111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data







17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data





19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data



195 Conclusion

20 Salem County






206 PRT Network

207 Years Built



21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation




2322 Objectives

233 Methodology










24 Warren County




5 Bergen County 31

7 Camden County 53

10 Essex County 0

12 Hudson County 31

14 Mercer County 52

18 Ocean County 124

20 Salem County 160

23 Union County 190

1 Executive Summary

4 Atlantic County

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 18

419 miles

433 interchanges

Total Trips

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

$573 $143 $401 $1117

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Figure 21

Figure 22

54 Final Network

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

6 Burlington County

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

Southern Network

64 Eastern Network

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

County Total Trip

Figure 36

The Final Network

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 310

Figure 311

Employment Stations

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

7 Camden County

8 Cape May County

in New Jersey

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 52 Costs

Wildwood Area

After Wildwood

Age Breakdown

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Cumberland County

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

Table 63 Evolution

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

Orange Park Orange

Verona Park Verona

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Newark 278154 20528

Orange 31058 8123

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

Verona 12937 3023

Fairfield 7707 2106

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex County NJ US

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

School Location

104 Industry

Employer Location

Verizon Newark NJ

Newark NJ

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Projected PnL

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Gloucester County

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Education

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

timestimes

timestimes+

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

13 Hunterdon County

133 Network Design

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

Figure 103

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

1423 Rural

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Total 2145088 2353841 911

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

Population 364883

Total Stations 491

1431 Entire Network

145 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

Table 117 Evolution

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

152 Initial Network

1531 Quick Overview

1542 Suburban

1543 Rural

155 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

1551 Judgement

1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

business

network

included

stations in year 2

Table 131 Evolution

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

Monmouth

Station 150

(below)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

newcost = cost

for i = 150

d = sort(E)

ratio = costLoS

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

ratMax = zeros(31)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1340 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

175 Final Network

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

fewer stations

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

Average Fare Paid 3

19 Passaic County

Trip ends served

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

4456114

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Stations Guidewa

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

Salem County

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

100000

120000

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

22 Sussex County

223 Network designs

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 194

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

Winfield Township

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

2313 Education

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

2314 Industry

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

2315 Recreation

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

Summit 3642

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Total 24676

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology

Table 205 Evolution

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Sunday 286494 3010

+ 1052

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

242 Placemarks

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

(per day)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Stations Interchang

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

1 Executive Summary











23 Summary Data





4 Atlantic County



43 Data Collection






5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network


54 Final Network



57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County


62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability


67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network



9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics



10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry







111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data







17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data





19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data



195 Conclusion

20 Salem County






206 PRT Network

207 Years Built



21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation




2322 Objectives

233 Methodology










24 Warren County




1 Executive Summary

4 Atlantic County

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 18

419 miles

433 interchanges

Total Trips

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

$573 $143 $401 $1117

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Figure 21

Figure 22

54 Final Network

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

6 Burlington County

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

Southern Network

64 Eastern Network

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

County Total Trip

Figure 36

The Final Network

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 310

Figure 311

Employment Stations

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

7 Camden County

8 Cape May County

in New Jersey

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 52 Costs

Wildwood Area

After Wildwood

Age Breakdown

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Cumberland County

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

Table 63 Evolution

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

Orange Park Orange

Verona Park Verona

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Newark 278154 20528

Orange 31058 8123

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

Verona 12937 3023

Fairfield 7707 2106

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex County NJ US

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

School Location

104 Industry

Employer Location

Verizon Newark NJ

Newark NJ

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Projected PnL

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Gloucester County

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Education

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

timestimes

timestimes+

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

13 Hunterdon County

133 Network Design

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

Figure 103

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

1423 Rural

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Total 2145088 2353841 911

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

Population 364883

Total Stations 491

1431 Entire Network

145 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

Table 117 Evolution

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

152 Initial Network

1531 Quick Overview

1542 Suburban

1543 Rural

155 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

1551 Judgement

1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

business

network

included

stations in year 2

Table 131 Evolution

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

Monmouth

Station 150

(below)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

newcost = cost

for i = 150

d = sort(E)

ratio = costLoS

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

ratMax = zeros(31)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1340 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

175 Final Network

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

fewer stations

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

Average Fare Paid 3

19 Passaic County

Trip ends served

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

4456114

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Stations Guidewa

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

Salem County

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

100000

120000

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

22 Sussex County

223 Network designs

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 194

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

Winfield Township

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

2313 Education

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

2314 Industry

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

2315 Recreation

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

Summit 3642

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Total 24676

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology

Table 205 Evolution

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Sunday 286494 3010

+ 1052

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

242 Placemarks

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

(per day)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Stations Interchang

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

1 Executive Summary











23 Summary Data





4 Atlantic County



43 Data Collection






5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network


54 Final Network



57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County


62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability


67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network



9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics



10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry







111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data







17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data





19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data



195 Conclusion

20 Salem County






206 PRT Network

207 Years Built



21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation




2322 Objectives

233 Methodology










24 Warren County




4 Atlantic County

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 18

419 miles

433 interchanges

Total Trips

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

$573 $143 $401 $1117

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Figure 21

Figure 22

54 Final Network

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

6 Burlington County

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

Southern Network

64 Eastern Network

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

County Total Trip

Figure 36

The Final Network

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 310

Figure 311

Employment Stations

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

7 Camden County

8 Cape May County

in New Jersey

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 52 Costs

Wildwood Area

After Wildwood

Age Breakdown

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Cumberland County

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

Table 63 Evolution

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

Orange Park Orange

Verona Park Verona

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Newark 278154 20528

Orange 31058 8123

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

Verona 12937 3023

Fairfield 7707 2106

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex County NJ US

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

School Location

104 Industry

Employer Location

Verizon Newark NJ

Newark NJ

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Projected PnL

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Gloucester County

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Education

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

timestimes

timestimes+

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

13 Hunterdon County

133 Network Design

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

Figure 103

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

1423 Rural

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Total 2145088 2353841 911

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

Population 364883

Total Stations 491

1431 Entire Network

145 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

Table 117 Evolution

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

152 Initial Network

1531 Quick Overview

1542 Suburban

1543 Rural

155 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

1551 Judgement

1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

business

network

included

stations in year 2

Table 131 Evolution

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

Monmouth

Station 150

(below)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

newcost = cost

for i = 150

d = sort(E)

ratio = costLoS

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

ratMax = zeros(31)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1340 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

175 Final Network

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

fewer stations

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

Average Fare Paid 3

19 Passaic County

Trip ends served

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

4456114

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Stations Guidewa

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

Salem County

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

100000

120000

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

22 Sussex County

223 Network designs

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 194

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

Winfield Township

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

2313 Education

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

2314 Industry

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

2315 Recreation

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

Summit 3642

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Total 24676

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology

Table 205 Evolution

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Sunday 286494 3010

+ 1052

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

242 Placemarks

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

(per day)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Stations Interchang

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

1 Executive Summary











23 Summary Data





4 Atlantic County



43 Data Collection






5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network


54 Final Network



57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County


62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability


67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network



9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics



10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry







111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data







17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data





19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data



195 Conclusion

20 Salem County






206 PRT Network

207 Years Built



21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation




2322 Objectives

233 Methodology










24 Warren County




4 Atlantic County

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 18

419 miles

433 interchanges

Total Trips

3702477

2672087

400813 44089 5 2 $ 020

Vehicle $100000 44089 cars $4409

$ 7165

$573 $143 $401 $1117

500 4 008 12 4 020 2 903

400 3 207 12 3 218 2 101

300 2405 12 2417 1299

250 2004 12 2016 899

225 1804 12 1816 698

200 1603 12 1615 498

150 1202 12 1214 97

137 1 106 12 1118 1

100 802 12 814 (304)

Trips Served

769448

120696

268062

967511

239204

372120 2741092

Possible Trips

1010208

130336

294318

1008927

245866

388049

3081756

5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

Figure 21

Figure 22

54 Final Network

Stations

Interchanges

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

(Tripsvehicle)

612 607 52604 13402769

4261660

639249 70317 5 2

$ 300 $ 020

entert

dinning Total

2193260

453044

1657101

8109491

901055

13288150

3536472

535084

1948686

9623340

1069260

16806892

Percentage 62 85 85 84 95 84 84 79

Stations Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Station lease and

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1224

$ 2630

$ 7032

$ 10886

$ 218 $ 639

$ 1728

$ 3835

$ 3858

$ 2130

6 Burlington County

62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

Southern Network

64 Eastern Network

192204 8170 88260 - - 510174 - 798808

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

trip Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Station lease and

128$ 303$ 66$ 497$ 40$ 10$ 6$ 56$ 12$ 2$ 14$ (41)$

County Total Trip

Figure 36

The Final Network

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 310

Figure 311

Employment Stations

1770364 101918 1005780 - - 4110124 - 6988186

1351403

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1084$ 2977$ 2230$ 6291$ 503$ 126$ 203$ 832$ 1216$ 20$ 1236$ 4040$

Fares Profit1 (40683)$ 2 (141)$ 3 40401$ 4 80943$ 5 121485$

7 Camden County

8 Cape May County

in New Jersey

Stations 22

Interchanges 14

Guideway 204 mi

Stations 204

Interchanges 111

Guideway 19739 mi

Table 52 Costs

Wildwood Area

After Wildwood

Age Breakdown

lt 18 37195 254

18 - 24 12447 85

25 - 44 45689 312

45 - 64 32070 219

gt 65 19037 130

Cumberland County

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

Table 63 Evolution

10 Essex County

101 Geography

Roseland Fairfield

Irvington

Livingston

Maplewood

Millburn

Montclair

Nutley

South Orange

Verona

West Caldwell

West Orange

Orange Park Orange

Verona Park Verona

1940 837340 -

1950 905949 82

1960 923345 19

1970 932526 10

1980 851304 -87

1990 778206 -86

2000 793633 20

Est 2009 770675 -29

Municipality Growth

Caldwell -28

Essex Fells -25

Glen Ridge -50

North Caldwell -38

Newark 278154 20528

Orange 31058 8123

Nutley 26171 6073

Caldwell 22732 5945

Millburn 18755 4917

Roseland +10

East Orange -64

Newark +17

Belleville -58

Bloomfield -80

Cedar Grove +32

Orange -55

Fairfield +91

Irvington -72

Livingston +22

Maplewood -79

Millburn -51

Montclair -52

Nutley -44

South Orange -64

Verona -44

West Caldwell -71

West Orange -53

Verona 12937 3023

Fairfield 7707 2106

Roseland 5352 1464

Essex County NJ US

388166

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 143335 647 651 653

College 47684 215 212 228

Total 221424

School Location

104 Industry

Employer Location

Verizon Newark NJ

Newark NJ

Home Trips 2337226 2234896 9510

Work Trips 763719 733687 9615

Student Trips 127679 119656 9372

Total 4708417 4491285 9484

Station $200 70700 $141400

1 Mile of Guideway $500 46225 $231125

PRT Vehicle $010 15694700 $1569470

Total $1941995

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

1 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

2 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

3 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

4 7767980000 000 000 7767980000

5 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

6 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

7 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

8 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

9 7767980000 194199500 388399000 8350578500

10 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

11 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

12 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

13 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

14 7767980000 388399000 776798000 8933177000

15 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

16 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

17 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

18 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

19 7767980000 582598500 1165197000 9515775500

20 000 776798000 1553596000 2330394000

I 0-4 7767980000 000 ($7767980000)

II 5-9 8350578500 1740000000 ($6610578500)

III 10-14 8933177000 2712000000 ($6221177000)

IV 15-19 9515775500 3630000000 ($5885775500)

Projected PnL

lt 18 67498 264

18 - 24 22755 89

25 - 44 77725 304

45 - 64 57782 226

gt 65 29914 117

Gloucester County

9 National Park

Borough 3205 14

14 West Deptford

Township 19368 178

15 East Greenwich

Township 5430 150

17 South Harrison

Township 2417 158

21 Washington

Township 47114 215

Economy Summary

Education Summary

Year Built

12 Hudson County

121 Geography

Hoboken Secaucus

Union City Kearny

Harrison

18-24 years old 63333 1040

25 to 44 years old 216795 3560

45 to 64 year olds 121795 2000

1950 647437

1960 610374 -57

1970 607839 -05

1980 556972 -84

1990 553099 -07

2000 608975 101

2008 (est) 595419 -22

Growth

East Newark -106

Bayonne -48

Jersey City 10

Hoboken 63

Union City -65

West New York 17

Guttenburg -19

Secaucus -35

Kearny -79

Harrison 54

North Bergen -33

Weehawken -79

Education

Hudson County NJ US

Population

Jersey City 242503

Union City 67088

Bayonne 58844

North Bergen 56146

West New York 46425

Hoboken 41015

Kearny 37295

Secaucus 15372

Harrison 15201

Weehawken 12441

Guttenburg 10601

East Newark 2126

288316

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 98199 623 651 653

College 41431 263 212 228

bull Holland Tunnel

bull NJ Route 101

bull NJ Route 185

bull NJ Route 18N

bull NJ Route 440

bull NJ Route 495

bull NJ Route 63

bull NJ Route 7

bull NJ Route 85

bull NJ Turnpike

bull Lincoln Tunnel

bull NJ Route 3

bull NJ Route 139

bull US Route 1

bull Union Turnpike

Home Trips 1217950 1212930 9959

Work Trips 383046 371691 9704

Total 4279755 4215076 9803

Station $200 490 $98000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 28579 $142890

PRT Vehicle $010 14971000 $1497100

Total $1737990

timestimes

timestimes+

Unit Cost $200000000 $500000000 $000 $10000000

I 0-4 6951980000 000 ($6951980000)

II 5-9 7473378500 1788000000 ($5685378500)

III 10-14 7994777000 2274000000 ($5720777000)

IV 15-19 8516175500 2592000000 ($5924175500)

13 Hunterdon County

133 Network Design

Trip Ends Served

461228 75708 9000 940 176328 723204

Served 913 699 938 638 682 819

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

144 79 29014 723204

327174 49076 2699 5 2

$210 $020

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$288 $1451 $270 $2009 $121 $40 $49 $210 $206 $5 $211 $154

Figure 103

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction

1423 Rural

Home Trip Ends 1306572 1451448 900

Work Trip Ends 393840 425649 925

Total 2145088 2353841 911

0-4 288085 342 275700 328

5-10 309563 368 294966 351

10-15 302708 360 287869 342

15-19 271020 322 254196 302

20-24 244628 291 235451 280

25-29 272873 324 272044 323

30-34 319031 379 325092 386

35-39 360230 428 367694 437

40-44 348061 414 359121 427

45-49 297845 354 313512 373

50-54 263357 313 284184 338

55-59 202559 241 220779 262

60-64 156073 185 174573 207

65-69 132558 158 160638 191

70-74 121639 145 159834 190

75-79 95560 114 144571 172

80-84 58291 069 104046 124

85+ 38732 046 97267 116

Total under 25 329

Total over 65 133

Sum 461

100-Sum 539

10 Unemployment 485

Population 364883

Total Stations 491

1431 Entire Network

145 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

491 456 47885 2046802 851997 127799 14058 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$982 $2394 $1406 $4782 $383 $96 $128 $606 $767 $18 $784

Table 117 Evolution

1 65 245 460 13023

2 58 20 96 4544

3 24 63

4 46 50 7 302

5 19 518

6 32 975

7 21 22 60 2111

8 30 108 29 3316

9 26 15 115 213

10 23 22 118 4394

11 22 15 57 2158

12 20 16 60 2957

13 23 18 61 2043

14 32 9 88 2402

15 50 44 29 3561

15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction

152 Initial Network

1531 Quick Overview

1542 Suburban

1543 Rural

155 Finances

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Operating

692 721 73464

2547825

1015024

152254 16748 5 2 $

300 $ 020

naming rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) $

1384 $ 3673 $

1675 $

6732 $

825 $ 914 $ 25

1551 Judgement

1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

NJ DOT Rideshare

business

network

included

stations in year 2

Table 131 Evolution

15 30 249420 2 27411 21 1608

5 108 89839 1 1214 25 1703

13 63 688714 38 323

6 83 568516 23 1575

8 1 11412 5 504

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1362$ 3607$ 2339$ 7307$ 585$ 146$ 213$ 943$ 1276$ 25$ 1300$ 357$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109

Stations

1 14 27 40 53 66 79 92 105

Highest to lowest

Monmouth

Station 150

(below)

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = -1

newcost = cost

for i = 150

d = sort(E)

ratio = costLoS

if i ==j

ratio(ij) = 0

ratMax = zeros(31)

ratMax(2) = col_ind

plot(sort(cost))

plot(d)

plot(cost(150))

plot(mean(ratio))

plot(ratio(140))

17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

Miles of Guideway

Length Total Trip

31 9 3067 270795 81239 12186

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1340 5 2 $300 $020

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$62 $153 $134 $349 $28 $7 $12 $47

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$73 $1 $74 $27

175 Final Network

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

334 218 41396 2113517 656350 98453

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

10830 5 2 $300 $020

$668 $2070 $1083 $3821 $306 $76 $98

rights Total

(M$) (M$)

$591 $12 $603 $122

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

NJ DOT Rideshare

182 Placemark Data

fewer stations

StationsInterchange

Miles of Guideway

LengthTotal Trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1404$ 3767$ 2047$ 7218$ 577$ 144$ 186$ 908$ 1117$ 25$ 1142$ 234$

$100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500

Ocean County PampL

Starting Station

Ending Station

Distance Traveled

657 612 10842 655 612 10841 114 612 10829 108 612 10803 658 612 10791 536 612 10775 115 612 10773 656 612 10746 660 612 10719 657 614 10717 655 614 10716 659 612 10714 114 614 10704 108 614 10678 537 612 10666 658 614 10666 657 613 10666 655 613 10665 534 612 10663 114 613 10653

if cost(ij) == Inf

cost(ij) = 0

for i = 120

Average Fare Paid 3

19 Passaic County

Trip ends served

Total 485120 54028 81138 480640 5432 4 1106362

4456114

Stations

changes

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

60 68 7962

1106362

137344

20602 2266 5 2

Stations Guidewa

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

Trip ends served

Total 1392420 178232 254910 1482332 7676 64 3315634

4457720

Miles of Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

Trips Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

218 237 29345 3315634

1233078 184962 20346 5 2

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1467

$ 2035

$ 3938

$ 315 $ 79

$ 579 $ 1110

$ 1118

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1573

828 1940

70 29213

4 1715

212 7676 64 3782

County Total Trip

Ends 1956

196 2569

72 32801

4 1907

192 7676 64

4456114

1605768

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

292 316 3874

3782984

1605768

240865

26495 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 1937

$ 2650

$ 5171

$ 1445

$ 1456

Trip ends served

n trans

landmark

s Total

Total 1703

512 2124

94 30297

6 1770

892 7676 64 3997

County Total Trip

1956196

256972

328014

1907192 7676 64

4456114

1793145

Stations

Interchange

Miles of

Guideway

Length

Total Trip ends

served Toal Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Average trip

Length

Average

Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

() () (miles)

(per day)

(per day) ()

(Miles)

(Tripsvehicle)

369 381 5500

3997614

1793145

268972

29587 5 2

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles Total

Cost of Capital

Maintenanc

Station

lease and

naming

rights Total

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$ 2750

$ 2959

$ 6447

$ 1614

$ 1627

Salem County

lt 18 16457 256

18 - 24 5014 78

25 - 44 17936 279

45 - 64 15557 242

gt 65 9321 145

1 78 22 46 6867

2 34 6 1 338

3 46 14 9 5135

4 15 7 2873 18389

21 Somerset County

211 Introduction

2121 Network 1

Trip Ends

4020 20149 85623 32 53924 40000 203748

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

30$ 86$ 17$ 133$ 11$ 3$ 2$ 15$ 9$ 1$ 10$ (5)$

2122 Network 2

Trip Ends

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

499200 1161000 3167600 000 2533400 2000000 9361200

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

22$ 59$ 8$ 89$ 7$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 4$ 0$ 5$ (5)$

02000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

3651 4061 32400 1726 66192 0 108030

1189960 119894 580284 3834 602552 280000 2776524 5553048

Name Number

Trip ends served

County Total Trip

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

34$ 53$ 9$ 96$ 8$ 2$ 1$ 10$ 5$ 1$ 5$ (5)$

2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends

100000

120000

matrices-loscsv

matrices-adjmatcsv

Miles of Guideway

Average Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

1 2 3 4 5

Fare ($)

22 Sussex County

223 Network designs

Trip Ends Served

313932 52242 62942 3541 108395 541052

Served 5440 7690 8830 9790 8570 6400

served Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op

222 109 3383 541052

216355 32453 1785 5 2

$326 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1692 $178

$2314 $139 $46 $32 $218 $212 $8 $220 $201

Figure 194

Figure 195

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

Winfield Township

Male 184788 354

Female 207812 398

Male 28329 54

Female 43712 84

1860 27780 -

1870 41859 507

1880 55571 328

1890 72467 304

1900 99353 371

1910 140197 411

1920 200157 428

1930 305209 525

1940 328344 76

1950 398138 213

1960 504255 267

1970 543116 77

1980 504094 -72

1990 493819 -20

2000 522541 58

Est 2009 526426 07

Population (2000)

Number Percentage

Fanwood 7174 59 08

Garwood 4153 -74 -18

Roselle 21274 960 47

Elizabeth 120568 10566 96

Linden 39394 2693 73

Rahway 26500 1175 46

Summit 21274 1374 70

Clark 14597 -32 -02

Cranford 22578 -55 -02

Hillside 21747 703 33

2313 Education

Union County NJ US

279004 534

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

Grades 1-12 88985 170 651 653

College 28216 54 212 228

136230 261

Lincoln School 40641241 -743423 140 5017

Tamaques School 40635729 -74338631 79 1784

McKinley School 40645106 -74352921 73 1761

2314 Industry

Merck and Co 40703037 -74281447 258 500

Schering-Plough 40681287 -74432081 150 250

WakeFern Food 40650951 -74389293 129 480

2315 Recreation

North Elizabeth 510

Elizabeth 4153

Linden 2265

Rahway 3195

RARITAN VALLEY LINE

Union 1230

Roselle Park 901

Cranford 1189

Garwood 85

Westfield 2321

Fanwood 917

Netherwood 603

Plainfield 2044

Summit 3642

New Providence 546

Murray Hill 564

Total 24676

2322 Objectives

233 Methodology

Table 205 Evolution

Home Trips 1545080 1495144 9677

Work Trips 423793 404435 9543

Total 3132577 3012265 9616

Station $200 604 $120800000000

1 Mile of Guideway $500 42408 $212040000000

PRT Vehicle $010 100409 $1004090000000

$1336930000000

Weekday 951942 10000

WEEKEND

Sunday 286494 3010

+ 1052

Unit Cost $200 $500 $000 $10

Year ($) ($) ($) ($)

0 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

1 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

2 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

3 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

4 5347720000 000 000 5347720000

5 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

6 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

7 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

8 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

9 5347720000 133693000 267386000 5748799000

10 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

11 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

12 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

13 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

14 5347720000 267386000 534772000 6149878000

15 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

16 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

17 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

18 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

19 5347720000 401079000 802158000 6550957000

20 000 534772000 1069544000 1604316000

I 0-4 000 000 ($7897400000)

II 5-9 5347720000 834000000 ($7655705000)

III 10-14 6149878000 2286000000 ($6796010000)

IV 15-19 6550957000 3522000000 ($6152315000)

24 Warren County

242 Placemarks

Trip Ends Served

156760 52344 42960 10000 23108 285172

Possible 410636 85191 55992 10000 31214 588033

Trip Ends Served 382 614 767 1000 740 485

Tot trip served

Total Trips

Peak hour Trips

Fleet size

Avg trip Length

Vehicle Op Costs

(per day)

99 102 25091 285172

14831 816 5 2

$300 $020

Basic Costs Revenue

Stations

Guideway

Vehicles

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

Figure 213

Trip Ends Served

938963

193640

108762 6718

317047

Stations Interchang

Length

Avg Vehicle

Occupancy Fare

Vehicle Op

144 79 29014 723204 327174 49076 2699 5 2 $210 $020

Possible

1492712

261471

127282 6718

416200

Trip Ends Served 629 741 854 1000 957 762

Stations Guideway

Maintenance

Operating

(M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$)

$1255 $82

$1534 $92 $31 $15 $138 $89 $4 $93 $(45)

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472

Highest to lowest

Figure 215

$290 $300 $310 $320 $330 $340 $350 $360

Figure 216

Dijkstrarsquos Cost

227 351 177

228 351 176

235 351 164

192 351 162

125 351 161

121 451 70

123 451 70

192 451 68

124 451 68

182 451 68

1 Executive Summary











23 Summary Data





4 Atlantic County



43 Data Collection






5 Bergen County

51 Introduction

52 Initial Network


54 Final Network



57 Conclusion

6 Burlington County


62 Initial Networks

63 Northern Network

64 Eastern Network

65 Profitability


67 Station types


69 Conclusion

7 Camden County

71 Background

72 My PRT System



8 Cape May County

81 Introduction

83 Final Network



9 Cumberland County

91 Demographics



10 Essex County

101 Geography



104 Industry







111 Demographics

112 PRT Network

113 PRT Summary

12 Hudson County

121 Geography


123 Education





13 Hunterdon County

131 Introduction

133 Network Design

14 Mercer County

141 Introduction




1423 Rural


1431 Entire Network


145 Finances




15 Middlesex County

151 Introduction




152 Initial Network



1531 Quick Overview




1542 Suburban

1543 Rural


155 Finances

1551 Judgement


1561 Fares

1562 TripsVehicle

157 Conclusion

16 Monmouth County

161 Introduction

162 Placemark Data







17 Morris County

171 Introduction

172 Transportation

173 Data

174 Initial Network

175 Final Network

18 Ocean County

181 Introduction

182 Placemark Data





19 Passaic County

191 Introduction

192 Data



195 Conclusion

20 Salem County






206 PRT Network

207 Years Built



21 Somerset County

211 Introduction


2121 Network 1

2122 Network 2

2123 Network 3



2132 Interchanges

2133 Trip Ends


215 Conclusion

22 Sussex County

221 Introduction

23 Union County

231 COUNTY OVERVIEW

2311 Geography


2313 Education

2314 Industry

2315 Recreation




2322 Objectives

233 Methodology










24 Warren County




Documents

Personal Rapid Transit - Operations Research and Financial