New Jersey

[roadman65]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

Don't be stupid. Those are obviously for hitchhikers 

Or for panhandler's.

[famartin]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

[storm2k]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

Pretty sure that's all about jurisdictional nonsense with NJ. They just repaved Washington Valley Rd in Bridgewater earlier this year. That's a county road (CR620) so Somerset County is responsible for its upkeep. At intersections, they improved the curbs including installing ADA compliant ramps and painting the crosswalks. Some stretches of the roadway have sidewalks and others don't. That's because it's on the municipality (Bridgewater Township in this case) to make sure sidewalks are built and maintained. That's why you end up with weirdness like this. Personally I think the law should be amended that requires sidewalks pretty much everywhere (at least main roads and secondary streets in residential neighborhoods) but that's not always the case.

[jeffandnicole]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

Pretty sure that's all about jurisdictional nonsense with NJ. They just repaved Washington Valley Rd in Bridgewater earlier this year. That's a county road (CR620) so Somerset County is responsible for its upkeep. At intersections, they improved the curbs including installing ADA compliant ramps and painting the crosswalks. Some stretches of the roadway have sidewalks and others don't. That's because it's on the municipality (Bridgewater Township in this case) to make sure sidewalks are built and maintained. That's why you end up with weirdness like this. Personally I think the law should be amended that requires sidewalks pretty much everywhere (at least main roads and secondary streets in residential neighborhoods) but that's not always the case.

Can't and shouldn't be law. Imagine running miles of sidewalks down every paved and unpaved road in the Pine Barrens or other rural area where they would never be used. It's bad enough rural intersections need to upgraded with pedestrian crosswalks and signals; we don't need more costly improvements that would serve almost no one, and the money spent takes away from other needed improvements elsewhere.

[storm2k]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

Pretty sure that's all about jurisdictional nonsense with NJ. They just repaved Washington Valley Rd in Bridgewater earlier this year. That's a county road (CR620) so Somerset County is responsible for its upkeep. At intersections, they improved the curbs including installing ADA compliant ramps and painting the crosswalks. Some stretches of the roadway have sidewalks and others don't. That's because it's on the municipality (Bridgewater Township in this case) to make sure sidewalks are built and maintained. That's why you end up with weirdness like this. Personally I think the law should be amended that requires sidewalks pretty much everywhere (at least main roads and secondary streets in residential neighborhoods) but that's not always the case.

Can't and shouldn't be law. Imagine running miles of sidewalks down every paved and unpaved road in the Pine Barrens or other rural area where they would never be used. It's bad enough rural intersections need to upgraded with pedestrian crosswalks and signals; we don't need more costly improvements that would serve almost no one, and the money spent takes away from other needed improvements elsewhere.

Pretty much everywhere doesn't mean everywhere everywhere.

[Alps]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

Pretty sure that's all about jurisdictional nonsense with NJ. They just repaved Washington Valley Rd in Bridgewater earlier this year. That's a county road (CR620) so Somerset County is responsible for its upkeep. At intersections, they improved the curbs including installing ADA compliant ramps and painting the crosswalks. Some stretches of the roadway have sidewalks and others don't. That's because it's on the municipality (Bridgewater Township in this case) to make sure sidewalks are built and maintained. That's why you end up with weirdness like this. Personally I think the law should be amended that requires sidewalks pretty much everywhere (at least main roads and secondary streets in residential neighborhoods) but that's not always the case.

What you're seeing is that unless peds are prohibited from crossing a given roadway leg, whenever they do substantial work (replace traffic signal, repave more than just a simple mill/surface) they put in the ramps. There doesn't have to be sidewalk there, but as long as pedestrians are ALLOWED there, they'll put it all in so that if the municipality, county or state ever decide to put a sidewalk on their road, it'll already be tied into something compliant. Also helps with resolving design issues - you don't (as the agency responsible) want to issue plans that are not ADA compliant without good reason (i.e. specifically resurfacing the road only and not touching anything beyond the curb).

[jeffandnicole]

That is the most New Jersey thing I have ever seen!   

I find it even funnier that the sidewalks and crosswalks in the middle do not lead anywhere; they just make a square around the intersection...

LOL classic NJ where they build a crosswalk but don't bother with the rest of the sidewalk 

Pretty sure that's all about jurisdictional nonsense with NJ. They just repaved Washington Valley Rd in Bridgewater earlier this year. That's a county road (CR620) so Somerset County is responsible for its upkeep. At intersections, they improved the curbs including installing ADA compliant ramps and painting the crosswalks. Some stretches of the roadway have sidewalks and others don't. That's because it's on the municipality (Bridgewater Township in this case) to make sure sidewalks are built and maintained. That's why you end up with weirdness like this. Personally I think the law should be amended that requires sidewalks pretty much everywhere (at least main roads and secondary streets in residential neighborhoods) but that's not always the case.

Can't and shouldn't be law. Imagine running miles of sidewalks down every paved and unpaved road in the Pine Barrens or other rural area where they would never be used. It's bad enough rural intersections need to upgraded with pedestrian crosswalks and signals; we don't need more costly improvements that would serve almost no one, and the money spent takes away from other needed improvements elsewhere.

Pretty much everywhere doesn't mean everywhere everywhere.

The problem with laws is they can apply to areas where it shouldn't, and not apply to areas where it should. In my suburban town, we got a new business to install sidewalks, even though for someone to get to them, someone will be walking on roadsfie a fair distance without sidewalks, and no legal way to get property owners to install them in those areas.  In the end, it was a feel-good ruling that made no sense, and cost the new business a fair amount of money. I honestly can't recall anyone ever using them when I passed by, mainly because of the safety factor to get to them in the first place.

[NJRoadfan]

Even when they just resurface the roads around here they'll come thru a week before and update anything to ADA compliance. Makes sense since they have to cut into the road edge to install the new ramp.

The theory for passing these laws and installing "fragment" sidewalks and bike lanes, is that over time eventually everything will be connected as new stuff is built or rehabbed.

[NE2]

But it's definitely interesting that this is the only example of a ground cloverleaf in the area.

Here's one with all the left turns.

[02 Park Ave]

With the GWB going cashless tomorrow, has it been announced how and when the toll booths will be removed and what the lane configuration will be thereafter?  The latter will be most interesting.

[MATraveler128]

With the GWB going cashless tomorrow, has it been announced how and when the toll booths will be removed and what the lane configuration will be thereafter?  The latter will be most interesting.

According to the press release by PANYNJ, it says that the toll booths will be demolished shortly after it is implemented with no specific date. My guess is that lane setup stays about the same.

[kernals12]

I wonder what sort of traffic impact will occur with free flow tolling.

[Alps]

I wonder what sort of traffic impact will occur with free flow tolling.

Since the bridge itself is a constraint on traffic, not much.

[cl94]

I wonder what sort of traffic impact will occur with free flow tolling.

Since the bridge itself is a constraint on traffic, not much.

I was going to say this. The chokepoint at the Hudson/East River crossings was never the toll plazas, but the crossings themselves. If you have 5 lanes of 80, 4 lanes of 95, 3 lanes of 4, 2 lanes of 1/9, 3 lanes from local roads in Fort Lee, and 2 from the PIP merging into 7 across the bridge, there are going to be issues. See how the backups are as bad heading into NJ. What it WILL likely do is make the merge a little smoother due to less stop/go from toll payment.

[jeffandnicole]

I wonder what sort of traffic impact will occur with free flow tolling.

Since the bridge itself is a constraint on traffic, not much.

I was going to say this. The chokepoint at the Hudson/East River crossings was never the toll plazas, but the crossings themselves. If you have 5 lanes of 80, 4 lanes of 95, 3 lanes of 4, 2 lanes of 1/9, 3 lanes from local roads in Fort Lee, and 2 from the PIP merging into 7 across the bridge, there are going to be issues. See how the backups are as bad heading into NJ. What it WILL likely do is make the merge a little smoother due to less stop/go from toll payment.

In reality it could make the backup a bit worse during times that are currently less congested. Assuming traffic is free-flowing on the bridge, traffic currently spreads itself out to 12 lanes & gets blocked a bit by the toll plaza. In the future, traffic won't have that constraint, will free-flow onto the bridge at a faster rate, and then get jammed at the next constraint down the roadway during a time thay may not have been jammed in the past.

[Alps]

I wonder what sort of traffic impact will occur with free flow tolling.

Since the bridge itself is a constraint on traffic, not much.

I was going to say this. The chokepoint at the Hudson/East River crossings was never the toll plazas, but the crossings themselves. If you have 5 lanes of 80, 4 lanes of 95, 3 lanes of 4, 2 lanes of 1/9, 3 lanes from local roads in Fort Lee, and 2 from the PIP merging into 7 across the bridge, there are going to be issues. See how the backups are as bad heading into NJ. What it WILL likely do is make the merge a little smoother due to less stop/go from toll payment.

In reality it could make the backup a bit worse during times that are currently less congested. Assuming traffic is free-flowing on the bridge, traffic currently spreads itself out to 12 lanes & gets blocked a bit by the toll plaza. In the future, traffic won't have that constraint, will free-flow onto the bridge at a faster rate, and then get jammed at the next constraint down the roadway during a time thay may not have been jammed in the past.

Doubtful. What really happens now is sideswipe crashes from the toll plaza merge. You'll get a net BENEFIT by not having that. The constraint on throughput from NY interchanges is much more limiting than the toll plaza capacity anyway, so that's why I think most of the time will be about the same as it is now.

[roadman65]

 I couldn’t help notice that in Keyport on NJ 35 you have two sets of mileage signs along the SB route.  The original Red Bank- Eatontown- Asbury Park is still there copied over to new mixed case from previous signs and then the 1998 addition of the set controls with updated mileages upon surpassing each city along the way. The 1998 sign placed near the aforementioned is got Eatontown- Brielle- Seaside Heights.

Is there a reason why they need both? Also that after the newer one they came by and replaced the older one and of course “ Eatontown “ is featured on both assemblies.  However the latest one still retains the all uppercase font.

https://goo.gl/maps/MiBK8zGMtxA21Zu58

https://goo.gl/maps/nouHyzV6GHgUeCzp8



Northbound you get only a lone Rahway control for 13 miles. Of course Rahway is NJ 35s northern end, but you would have figured that Perth Amboy would also be listed being it’s population is big enough with the route entering its city limits. Also the side road control for NJ 35 is “ The Amboys” so one of the two Amboy cities you would figure should be used.

https://goo.gl/maps/f81BtqBfrmNDhJoYA

Different point from first paragraph, but in any case NJ has gotten bad with mileage signs including ignoring the interstates to comply with other states minus Connecticut of corse who I have found is worse than NJ in mileage sign postings.

[kernals12]

Does anyone know the story of the section of US 22 in Springfield and Union where it becomes a one-way pair?

I think it's an extremely clever design since it gets rid of left turns.

[jeffandnicole]

Does anyone know the story of the section of US 22 in Springfield and Union where it becomes a one-way pair?

I think it's an extremely clever design since it gets rid of left turns.

You're referring to the area where there's numerous u-turn channels and businesses in the median, all of which require left turns?

[kernals12]

Does anyone know the story of the section of US 22 in Springfield and Union where it becomes a one-way pair?

I think it's an extremely clever design since it gets rid of left turns.

You're referring to the area where there's numerous u-turn channels and businesses in the median, all of which require left turns?

Yes, but the left turns aren't against the flow of traffic.

I think if they reduced the number of driveways, they'd really have something brilliant.

[NJRoadfan]

It was the brainchild of the mayor of Union NJ. The state wanted to widen the roadway, but the township didn't want to lose the tax revenue, so they built the new westbound lanes behind existing businesses. Its not clever, its hell. Try driving it sometime.

[SignBridge]

I used to drive that stretch as a young guy back in the 1970's and I always found it an interesting area. But I guess with today's traffic, it's probably become antiquated and dangerous.

Does anyone know what year that widening took place? Definitely before 1958 when I first rode thru there with my parents and saw the ship in the median. Anyone know if that's still there?

[NJRoadfan]

The flagship is still there albeit a circa 1986 building. The second roadway was likely built around 1940-41 going by the dates on the overpasses.

[kernals12]

It was the brainchild of the mayor of Union NJ. The state wanted to widen the roadway, but the township didn't want to lose the tax revenue, so they built the new westbound lanes behind existing businesses. Its not clever, its hell. Try driving it sometime.

Can't be as hellish as a typical 4 lane undivided stroad where it's just one red light after another.

[famartin]

It was the brainchild of the mayor of Union NJ. The state wanted to widen the roadway, but the township didn't want to lose the tax revenue, so they built the new westbound lanes behind existing businesses. Its not clever, its hell. Try driving it sometime.

Can't be as hellish as a typical 4 lane undivided stroad where it's just one red light after another.

I rarely use it, but have been told it's usually stop and go during rush hour.

I can tell by your use of STROAD that you're a road dieter...