**NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NJ Transit No**  **Fare Increase RACM Analysis** 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 1 **Control Measure:** Encourage the use of transit by not increasing fares despite inflationary pressures. **Description:** Transit ridership is dependant on many factors includi ng out
- of
- pocket costs such as transit fare s . One way to achieve greater ridership would be to limit or eliminate fare increase s such that the real cost to transit riders goes down relative to inflation and other modes . This would encourage more people to switch modes resulting in air quality benefits. **Methodology :**  The modeling tools and procedures used to predict the interaction between transit fare s and ridership gen erally do not reflect the impact of inflation. Rather than modeling no fare increase directly, a fare decrease equal to inflation was applied to transit fares while all other transportation costs were held constant

. Inflation was assumed to be Each of the MPO/Ozone Non
-Attainment areas was analyzed using available tools, data and assumptions. W hile using the regional transportation models would have been optimal, time and data requirements made this option impractical for the purposes of this study. Instead, the follow ing models and procedures were applied: NJTPA Region In this region a simplified, spreadsheet version of the NJ Transit Regional Transportation Demand M odel was used to estimate the change in ridership. This highly automated spreadsheet know as Quick
- Share was recently updated to reflect the assumptions, constants and coeffici ents found in the most recent version of the full NJ Transit regional model. Q uick
- Share works by looking at individual transit markets and then estimating the change and market share based on changes in the input values such as transit headways, available modes and transit pricing. The entire northern New Jersey ozone non
- attainme nt area was divided into 9 different markets blanketing the entire region. The definition and the size of th ese markets were supplied by NJ Transit and correspond to existing market definitions used by the agency. Samples of the Quick
- Share inputs and re sults can be found at the end of this document. Overall results were as follows: Total Trips Reduced Region wide : 7,475 Total Vehicle Trips Reduced Region wide: 6,399 Total Vehicle Miles of Travel Reduced Region W ide: 133,407**NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NJ Transit No**  **Fare Increase RACM Analysis** 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 2 DVRPC and South Jersey Regions In order to calculate the impact of a no -fare
- increase policy in these areas, a simple price elasticity was used. Current ridership for various markets in the south ern New Jersey were obtained from NJ Transit

. A fare elasticity of
- 0.25 used for bot h the DVRPC and South Jersey regions as suggested by NJ Tran sit. The resulting increase in transit trips was divided by the average vehicle occupancy in the region to get the total number of trips re duced, and the average trip length for trips in the regi on was used to calculate the total vehicle miles of travel eliminated. A summary of these calculations can be found in Table 1. The VT and VMT reductions a ttributed to DVRPC and SJTPO region are shown in Table 2. **Distribution of VT/VMT Reductions to Co unties and Emissions A** **naly sis**  Once the VT and VMT reduction s by MPO had been established, these reductions were further distributed to the county level. This distribution was developed from a weighted average combining the transit mode share and populati on in each county. Table 3 summarizes the results of this redistribution. Finally, the VT and VMT reductions were used as input into the Emissions Only analysis found in the NJ
-AQONE software package. Peak summer day and annual emission reductions were calculated by the software for every county, and the county data was aggregated into non
- attainment areas. The results are shown in the following Tables: **Results: Statewide**  **Summer Day /A** **nnual Benefits**  Total VT Reduced = **8,222** trips/day Statewide Total VM T Reduced = **148,263** miles/day Statewide **Emission Reductions (Statewide) :** 

**Pollutant Ty**  **pe An**  **aly sis Year 20**  **09**

Tons/Day T ons/Year **VOC** 0.07
- **NOx** 0.08 19.15 **PM2.5**
- 0.54 **SO 2**  - 0.33**NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NJ Transit No**  **Fare Increase RACM Analysis** 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 3 **Ozone A naly** **sis –**  **Daily Benefits in New** **Jersey**
**Benefits (Reductions**  **) Ozone**  **Non -** **At tainment**  **Ar ea** 

**New York -**  **N. New Jersey** **- Long Island,**  **NY -**  **NJ -**  **CT Philadelphia**  ****

**Wilmin gton**  **- Atlantic City**  **PA -**  **NJ -**  **MD -**  **DE VT**  6,399 1,283 **VMT** 133,406 10,464 **VOC (Tons/Day )**  0.066 0.0057 **NOx (Tons/Day** **)** 0.071 0.0055 **PM2.5 A naly** **sis –**  **An nual Benefits**  **i n New Jersey** 

**Benefits (Reductions)**  **PM 2.5**  **Non -** **At tainment A** **rea**

**New York -**  **N. New Jersey** **- Long Island,**  **NY -**  **NJ -**  **CT Philadelphia**  **** **Wilmin gton**  **PA -**  **NJ -**  **DE VT**  1,607,750 115,750 **VMT** 32,949,750 944,250 **NOx (Tons/Year)** 17.55 0.538 **PM2.5 (Tons/Year)** 0.49 0.017 **SO 2**  **(Ton s/Year)**  0.30 0.010 **Cost/Benefit A naly** **sis** Total costs of the program were as follows: Lost revenue = 11.5% x Current Total farebox Reveneues

= 11.5% x $530.6 million **= $61.02 Million** Average Fare Paid = Total Farebox Revenues / Ridership

= $530.6 Million / $237.4 Million Riders = $2.24 / Rider Currently

- 11.5% (to account for no fare increase) = $1.98/New Rider New Riders: NJTPA: 7,475

DVRPC & SJTPO: 2,497 Total: 9,972 Additional Riders**NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NJ Transit No**  **Fare Increase RACM Analysis** 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 4 **Total A dditional Revenue**  **= 9,972 * $1.98 = $19,744** **.56 Net Cost = $61.02 Million**  **- $19,745 = $61.0 Million**  Total costs of the program would be incurred across the state, even in areas not part of a particular non
- attainment area. Total costs were proportioned by the expected vehicle trip reductions with in the respective non
-attainment areas: For Ozone 83.3% to the NY
- NJ
- CT non
- attainment area or $50.8 Million 16.7% to the PA
- NJ
- DE
- MD non
- attainment area $10.2 Million For PM 2.5 93.3% to the NY
- NJ
- CT non
- attainment area or $56.9 Million 6.7% to the PA
- NJ
- DE non
- attainment area or $4.1Million
**Cost/Benefit Results**

**Pollutant Cost/Benefit for Each Pollutant**  **Ozone PM 2.5** ***** **NY -**  **NJ -**  **CT PA** **- NJ**  **- DE**  **- MD**  **NY -**  **NJ -**  **CT PA** **- NJ**  **- DE**  VOC ($/Ton/Day) $764,862,689 $1,786,818,327
- - NOx ($/Ton/Day) $717,569,977 $1,857,653,4 22
- - NOx ($/Ton/Year)
- - $810,349,284 $1,904,820,725 PM2.5 ($/Ton/Year)
- - $28,932,807,672 $58,922,210,876 SO2 ($/Ton/Year)
- - $47,752,781,465 $98,846,259,998
*Annual Costs used in calculation of cost/benefit ratio are daily costs mu ltiplie d by250Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 5

**Table 1: Summary**

**of Fare Elasticity**

**Calculation for the DVRPC and SJTPO Regions**

**Ma rket**  **Riders Fair**  **Change Elasticity**  **New Ridership**  **Av g. Veh.** 

**Occupancy Veh.** 

**Trips Reduced**  **Av erage** 

**Trip Length**  **VMT**

**Reduced** SJ Local Bus 39,200
- 11.5%
- 0.25 40,327 1.37 823 8.15 6,704 SJ Commuter Bus 15,100
- 11.5%
- 0.25 15,534 1.37 317 8.15 2,583 Seashore Bus 700
- 11.5%
- 0.25 720 1.37 15 8.15 120 Phil Commuter Bus 27,900
- 11.5%
- 0.25 28,702 1.37 585 8.15 4,772 AC Rail (Summer) 3,960
- 11.5%
- 0.25 4,074 1.37 83 8.1 5 677 **Table 2: Distribution of VT/VMT Benefits to MPO Regions For NJTPA**  **Veh Trips**  **Reduced VMT** 

**Reduced** 6,399 133,407
**For DVRPC and SJTPO**

**Ma rket**  **New**

**Riders Veh** 

**Trips Reduced**  **VMT**

**Red uced**  **DVRPC SJTPO** 

**Percent in MPO**  **Veh**

**Trips Reduced**  **VMT**

**Reduced Percent** 

**in MPO Veh** 

**Trips Reduced**  **VMT**

**Reduced** SJ Local Bus 1,127 823 6,704 70% 576 4,693 30% 247 2,011 SJ Commuter Bus 434 317 2,583 30% 95 775 70% 222 1,808 Seashore Bus 20 15 120 0% 0 0 100% 15 120 Phil Commuter Bus 802 585 4,772 80% 468 3,817 20% 117 954 AC Rail (Summer) 114 83 677 50% 42 339 50% 42 339 **Total:** 1,181 9,624 **Total:** 642 5,232Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 6

**Table 3: Distribution of VT/VMT Reductions By County**  **County Percent of** 

**Total MPO Transit**  **Trips VT Reduction**  **VMT Reduction**  Bergen 14.79% 946 19,725 Essex 21.18% 1,355 28,253 Hudson 28.33% 1,813 37,800 Hunterdon 0.26% 17 349 Middlesex 9.62% 616 12,839 Monmouth 7.42% 475 9,897 Morris 2.57% 165 3,432 Ocean 1.54% 98 2,052 Passaic 5.1 3% 328 6,842 Somerset 1.88% 121 2,514 Sussex 0.35% 22 466 Union 6.78% 434 9,042 Wa rren 0.15% 9 195 NJTPA 100.00% 6,399 133,407 Atlantic 53.87% 346 2,819 Cape May 19.13% 123 1,001 Cumberland 21.49% 138 1,124 Salem 5.51% 35 288 SJTPO 100.00% 6 42 5,232 Burlington 14.45% 93 756 Camden 50.21% 322 2,627 Gloucester 7.54% 48 394 Mercer 27.81% 178 1,455 DVRPC (NJ) 100.00% 1,181 9,624Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 7 Sample Input Screen from Quickshare