New Jersey Turnpike

[jeffandnicole]

I'm focused on just the NJTP and don't you think my listed projects are bigger priorities over expanding to 6 lanes exits 1 to 4?

You're just focused on *specific* projects on the NJ Tpk, and we've already told you that we feel the 1-4 widening should be a bigger priority than other projects.

Per the 2020 CIP, those projects total $1.1 billion. 

Given that the whole CIP totals $24.1 billion, those widening projects would seem worthy of high priority.

Agreed, and given that traffic volumes will only rise in years forthcoming, it will certainly be a pressing need in a decade if not completed already, again, notably during peak travel periods.

Remember the CIP covers both roadways, and the toll increases cover both roadways, so the NJTA won't be able to just constrain all their projects to one roadway.

Also, priorities come in all sorts of needs and wants.  The NJ-PA Turnpike Connector is probably going to be a priority because there's already a well known issue with the bridge, and I'm sure its life expectancy was greatly reduced after the crack formed.  A bridge collapse has the potential to kill many motorists, both on the bridge and below, and would severely undermine the enter nation's confidence in our highway system (more than it already is).  Without any redundancy within the tolled corridor, and insufficient redundancy outside of the tolled corridor, we're probably going to see this project advance relatively quickly.

There's other projects on the GSP that are low cost but have been issues for years, such as some of the partial interchanges.  Exit 17 for Sea Isle is often cited as a nuisance, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's a higher than normal accident rate in the area due to how motorists need to turn around and access the interchange.

Other items, such as the fiberoptic network replacement, don't directly affect our drive. But if they are utilized for communications for EZ Pass and the electronic overhead signage, a disruption in that network has significant affects on how the Turnpike can control traffic, and how our transactions may or may not be recorded properly.

So anything we may see as a priority because we can physically see it, may not be a priority to the Turnpike because their engineering department knows they have a limited time to complete other projects.  And priorities just don't come in high-priced projects.  A $2 million project can easily advance faster than a $200 million project due to its limited scope.

[Beltway]

Agreed, and given that traffic volumes will only rise in years forthcoming, it will certainly be a pressing need in a decade if not completed already, again, notably during peak travel periods.

After the lower turnpike is widened to 6 lanes, that means that the combined corridor with I-295  will be 10 lanes minimum.

That will narrow down to 8 lanes to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridges ... will traffic soon demand more capacity across the DMB?

[sprjus4]

Agreed, and given that traffic volumes will only rise in years forthcoming, it will certainly be a pressing need in a decade if not completed already, again, notably during peak travel periods.

After the lower turnpike is widened to 6 lanes, that means that the combined corridor with I-295  will be 10 lanes minimum.

That will narrow down to 8 lanes to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridges ... will traffic soon demand more capacity across the DMB?

According to New Jersey's AADT map, I-295 has 25,818 AADT approaching the bridge, and 48,800 AADT on the Turnpike according to that previous 2017 report.

Combined that is 74,618 AADT merging to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridge, though Delaware's AADT map shows 100,196 AADT on the bridge.

Whatever it may be, in the long-term, construction of a new 4 lane bridge (2 lanes each way) to create a 12 lane bridge may be a good option.

It could be simply split traffic, or managed in a way that I-295 traffic uses the new 4 lane bridge and Turnpike traffic uses the existing 8 lanes. Another option could be the new 4 lane bridge could be apart of an "thru" roadway for traffic going from the New Jersey Turnpike directly to I-95, and the existing 8 lanes for I-295 traffic and Turnpike traffic exiting at DE-9 / US-13, bound to Dover and points south.

[Alps]

Agreed, and given that traffic volumes will only rise in years forthcoming, it will certainly be a pressing need in a decade if not completed already, again, notably during peak travel periods.

After the lower turnpike is widened to 6 lanes, that means that the combined corridor with I-295  will be 10 lanes minimum.

That will narrow down to 8 lanes to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridges ... will traffic soon demand more capacity across the DMB?

According to New Jersey's AADT map, I-295 has 25,818 AADT approaching the bridge, and 48,800 AADT on the Turnpike according to that previous 2017 report.

Combined that is 74,618 AADT merging to cross the Delaware Memorial Bridge, though Delaware's AADT map shows 100,196 AADT on the bridge.

Whatever it may be, in the long-term, construction of a new 4 lane bridge (2 lanes each way) to create a 12 lane bridge may be a good option.

It could be simply split traffic, or managed in a way that I-295 traffic uses the new 4 lane bridge and Turnpike traffic uses the existing 8 lanes. Another option could be the new 4 lane bridge could be apart of an "thru" roadway for traffic going from the New Jersey Turnpike directly to I-95, and the existing 8 lanes for I-295 traffic and Turnpike traffic exiting at DE-9 / US-13, bound to Dover and points south.

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

[Beltway]

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

His NJ figures may well be fine, but as you say not accounting for the other highways that connect to the two local I-295 interchanges at Deepwater.

So already 100 thousand AADT on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

[sprjus4]

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

Yes.

[Alps]

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

His NJ figures may well be fine, but as you say not accounting for the other highways that connect to the two local I-295 interchanges at Deepwater.

So already 100 thousand AADT on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

100K on an 8-lane roadway doesn't concern me. The approaches on the NJ side are generally free-flowing, so I'm gonna say "no" to your question. However, Delaware has some serious work to be done on its side to provide enough capacity for the I-295 to I-95 movements.

[sprjus4]

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

His NJ figures may well be fine, but as you say not accounting for the other highways that connect to the two local I-295 interchanges at Deepwater.

So already 100 thousand AADT on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

100K on an 8-lane roadway doesn't concern me. The approaches on the NJ side are generally free-flowing, so I'm gonna say "no" to your question. However, Delaware has some serious work to be done on its side to provide enough capacity for the I-295 to I-95 movements.

How about in 20 or 30 years?

[jeffandnicole]

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

His NJ figures may well be fine, but as you say not accounting for the other highways that connect to the two local I-295 interchanges at Deepwater.

So already 100 thousand AADT on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

100K on an 8-lane roadway doesn't concern me. The approaches on the NJ side are generally free-flowing, so I'm gonna say "no" to your question. However, Delaware has some serious work to be done on its side to provide enough capacity for the I-295 to I-95 movements.

How about in 20 or 30 years?

In 30 years the original DMB will be 100 years old, so the likelihood of a complete replacement may not be out of the realm anyway.

The DRBA should really be considering something to replace the Ferry system they have, but current board members would probably treat it as a "not my problem" issue and will keep pushing it down the line.  They would also need to get DelDOT and NJDOT/NJTA on board with projects on either side as well.

[Alps]

Your NJ AADT figures are not accounting for US 40 and other local traffic (NJ 49, US 130, CR 540, CR 551). I'd trust DE.

His NJ figures may well be fine, but as you say not accounting for the other highways that connect to the two local I-295 interchanges at Deepwater.

So already 100 thousand AADT on the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

100K on an 8-lane roadway doesn't concern me. The approaches on the NJ side are generally free-flowing, so I'm gonna say "no" to your question. However, Delaware has some serious work to be done on its side to provide enough capacity for the I-295 to I-95 movements.

How about in 20 or 30 years?

125K? Still OK.

[Beltway]

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

Yes.

Tongue-in-cheek.

It would only provide marginal relief to the DMB.

[sprjus4]

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

Yes.

Tongue-in-cheek.

It would only provide marginal relief to the DMB.

Would be still a beneficial connection to the Garden State Pkwy from the south.

[1995hoo]

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

Yes.

Tongue-in-cheek.

It would only provide marginal relief to the DMB.

What Would You Say if there were a Crash on that Satellite crossing?

[Beltway]

Time for a Delaware Bay Bridge?   

Yes.

Tongue-in-cheek.  It would only provide marginal relief to the DMB.

Would be still a beneficial connection to the Garden State Pkwy from the south.

Both states would have to show sufficient interest in order to get it built.

[storm2k]

Today on NJ.com: Turnpike Authority's $24B plan provides few jobs, pollutes the air and cripples mass transit

Talk about trying to grab for a brass ring and falling flat on your faces. Did these people do even a mild modicum of research to see that the NJTA doesn't do mass transit projects? Also, has there ever been an official study to show if PA's mass transit agencies are way better off with all the money they get from Acts 44 and 89?

I couldn't read through this without rolling my eyes.

[sprjus4]

That was a good laugh.

NJTA says the widenings will reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality. But that is a lot like trying to cure obesity by loosening your belt. Many studies and real-life experience show that widening only provides temporary (average of 4 years) relief from congestion. Longer term, it leads to "induced demand."  To paraphrase the Field of Dreams, if you build it, the cars will come rings true — e.g. 15 lanes on the Parkway and still drivers have no relief from rush hour and summer traffic.

Well, I guess that recently built 12 lane section is a bottleneck. Sadly, the actual reality is that it works, quite well actually, and will in 20 years. The remaining 4 lane segments on the Turnpike need 6 lane widening, and many segments of the Parkway need widening as well.

We do not oppose toll increases, but NJTA must redo its plan with a priority placed on "best value"  investments, mass transit and "fix it first"  strategies. Superior projects to highway expansion include the Gateway Tunnel, expanding the Hudson Bergen Light Rail, and investments in NJ Transit. These projects, already drastically underfunded, now due to the pandemic also face the twin perils of reduced ridership and a strained General Fund.

Since when does the NJTA fund outside projects on facilities it doesn't operate?

And yes, completing those projects will surely significantly reduce -long distance traffic- congestion much more than needed widening when a small amount of locals are removed from the picture.

They made this same "transit"  and "rail"  argument with I-81 in Virginia, it doesn't work and backfires every time. No research ever goes into these RE/T pieces, do they? Will they ever get a brain?

[storm2k]

That was a good laugh.

Since when does the NJTA fund outside projects on facilities it doesn't operate?

I believe they do dedicate a small bit of their toll revenue as payments to NJDOT for various things, but it's negligible in the overall picture.

[jeffandnicole]

Today on NJ.com: Turnpike Authority's $24B plan provides few jobs, pollutes the air and cripples mass transit

Talk about trying to grab for a brass ring and falling flat on your faces. Did these people do even a mild modicum of research to see that the NJTA doesn't do mass transit projects? Also, has there ever been an official study to show if PA's mass transit agencies are way better off with all the money they get from Acts 44 and 89?

I couldn't read through this without rolling my eyes.

And that linked "study" was worth an eye-rolling good laugh as well.  Supposedly they compared pollution levels from 2000-2016 in 3,080 counties in the US, then compared it to Covid-19 deaths (all 2 month's worth), and claimed there was a link.  Without a doubt, that study was rushed, and absolutely ignored other facts such as: Where spread can be easily accomplished, which would be in congested counties, there would be more people.  Where would you find higher levels of pollution?  In congested counties.  Might as well have printed a study saying traffic lights cause Covid-19 deaths as well, since more controlled intersections would be found in congested counties.

The study should've never been printed, and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

[sprjus4]

and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

It says "Opinion" in the title and is in the "Opinion" section.

[jeffandnicole]

and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

It says "Opinion" in the title and is in the "Opinion" section.

I was referencing the linked study within the opinion article.  That's how I got the information not contained within the opinion piece:

The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) hasn't gotten the message. In the midst of the pandemic and without any meaningful public input, it has proposed a $24 billion capital plan that will dramatically increase greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which, as shown in a recent front page article in The Star-Ledger, has led to a higher risk of New Jersey residents dying of COVID-19.

The linked article is: https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/04/njs-coronavirus-death-toll-is-likely-higher-thanks-to-decades-of-dirty-air.html . This was not labeled as Opinion.

The Harvard study examined air pollution levels in 3,080 counties around the United States between 2000 and 2016, and compared the air pollution data to COVID-19 death counts in each of those counties. The study focused on fine particle pollution (known as PM2.5), which is one of multiple air pollutants that are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The researchers concluded that a small increase in a county's long-term exposure to the particle pollution led to a large increase that county's COVID-19 death rate.

[sprjus4]

and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

It says "Opinion" in the title and is in the "Opinion" section.

I was referencing the linked study within the opinion article.  That's how I got the information not contained within the opinion piece:

The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) hasn't gotten the message. In the midst of the pandemic and without any meaningful public input, it has proposed a $24 billion capital plan that will dramatically increase greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which, as shown in a recent front page article in The Star-Ledger, has led to a higher risk of New Jersey residents dying of COVID-19.

The linked article is: https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/04/njs-coronavirus-death-toll-is-likely-higher-thanks-to-decades-of-dirty-air.html . This was not labeled as Opinion.

The Harvard study examined air pollution levels in 3,080 counties around the United States between 2000 and 2016, and compared the air pollution data to COVID-19 death counts in each of those counties. The study focused on fine particle pollution (known as PM2.5), which is one of multiple air pollutants that are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The researchers concluded that a small increase in a county's long-term exposure to the particle pollution led to a large increase that county's COVID-19 death rate.

Oh, because anything concluded by a study is a "fact".

[jeffandnicole]

and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

It says "Opinion" in the title and is in the "Opinion" section.

I was referencing the linked study within the opinion article.  That's how I got the information not contained within the opinion piece:

The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) hasn't gotten the message. In the midst of the pandemic and without any meaningful public input, it has proposed a $24 billion capital plan that will dramatically increase greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which, as shown in a recent front page article in The Star-Ledger, has led to a higher risk of New Jersey residents dying of COVID-19.

The linked article is: https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/04/njs-coronavirus-death-toll-is-likely-higher-thanks-to-decades-of-dirty-air.html . This was not labeled as Opinion.

The Harvard study examined air pollution levels in 3,080 counties around the United States between 2000 and 2016, and compared the air pollution data to COVID-19 death counts in each of those counties. The study focused on fine particle pollution (known as PM2.5), which is one of multiple air pollutants that are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The researchers concluded that a small increase in a county's long-term exposure to the particle pollution led to a large increase that county's COVID-19 death rate.

Oh, because anything concluded by a study is a "fact".

Oh boy...

You are misunderstanding. You said the article I quoted was an opinion article. I simply tried telling you the article I was referencing was not an opinion article.

The problem is you didn't quote my entire message, so now you're misapplying what I'm trying to say.  In fact, my entire original comment was saying this study shouldn't be construed as fact. You have managed to spin everything around that I originally said.

[sprjus4]

and the NJ.com article, which read more like an opinion article, should have never been passed off as fact.

It says "Opinion" in the title and is in the "Opinion" section.

I was referencing the linked study within the opinion article.  That's how I got the information not contained within the opinion piece:

The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) hasn't gotten the message. In the midst of the pandemic and without any meaningful public input, it has proposed a $24 billion capital plan that will dramatically increase greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which, as shown in a recent front page article in The Star-Ledger, has led to a higher risk of New Jersey residents dying of COVID-19.

The linked article is: https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/04/njs-coronavirus-death-toll-is-likely-higher-thanks-to-decades-of-dirty-air.html . This was not labeled as Opinion.

The Harvard study examined air pollution levels in 3,080 counties around the United States between 2000 and 2016, and compared the air pollution data to COVID-19 death counts in each of those counties. The study focused on fine particle pollution (known as PM2.5), which is one of multiple air pollutants that are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The researchers concluded that a small increase in a county's long-term exposure to the particle pollution led to a large increase that county's COVID-19 death rate.

Oh, because anything concluded by a study is a "fact".

Oh boy...

You are misunderstanding. You said the article I quoted was an opinion article. I simply tried telling you the article I was referencing was not an opinion article.

The problem is you didn't quote my entire message, so now you're misapplying what I'm trying to say.  In fact, my entire original comment was saying this study shouldn't be construed as fact. You have managed to spin everything around that I originally said.

I was making a sarcastic comment from which some view any study to be a "fact", such as those publishing a news article calling it such. I agree with what you're saying, it shouldn't be deemed as fact.

[PHLBOS]

Page 21: GSP - Eliminating Exit 30; Full interchange at Exit 29

Interesting Project to eliminate Exit 30 in favor of Exit 29.  I think a lot of people on Laurel Drive will appreciate that, and there's no businesses in that immediate vicinity that would be impacted. However, it's noted that CR 559 will probably need upgrading and the new double left turn lane coming off the Causeway onto 559 may become a bit overloaded during prime travel periods.

Along Laurel Drive, there is one local gas station (US Gas) that would sure lose revenue from summer Shore traffic if that partial GSP interchange is eliminated.  I've used Exit 30 many times for my trips to Ocean City.

[Roadrunner75]

Page 21: GSP - Eliminating Exit 30; Full interchange at Exit 29

Interesting Project to eliminate Exit 30 in favor of Exit 29.  I think a lot of people on Laurel Drive will appreciate that, and there's no businesses in that immediate vicinity that would be impacted. However, it's noted that CR 559 will probably need upgrading and the new double left turn lane coming off the Causeway onto 559 may become a bit overloaded during prime travel periods.

Along Laurel Drive, there is one local gas station (US Gas) that would sure lose revenue from summer Shore traffic if that partial GSP interchange is eliminated.  I've used Exit 30 many times for my trips to Ocean City.

There's also a grilled cheese place on that stretch we've been to that made it on Diners Drive-ins and Dives.  I'm sure that won't help their business either, assuming they can get through our current crisis.