The Opportunity in Former Gas Stations

Started by kernals12, August 24, 2021, 07:37:24 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

jas

I've worked in the envirnmental field, both as a technician and now a site manager for almost 30 years now, both in the provate and public sector.  While former gas stations are an environmental issue, since the contamination is mostly hydrocarbon-based, they are much easier to remediate than former dry cleaners, and any type of solvent or chemical manufacturing plant.  The main issue with former gas stations is making sure surrounding receptors are not impacted.  The gasoline by-produts that are of concern are BTEX and MTBE, both of which can be treated with carbon.  Contaminants such as PCE and TCE, which are the after effects of dry cleaners are much more difficult to treat, as they don't break down in the manner that VOCs such as benzene and other gasoline by-products do.  Former gas stations are much easier to rehabilitate than so many other hazardous waste sites. 


Rothman

Quote from: jas on August 27, 2021, 06:31:27 AM
I've worked in the envirnmental field, both as a technician and now a site manager for almost 30 years now, both in the provate and public sector.  While former gas stations are an environmental issue, since the contamination is mostly hydrocarbon-based, they are much easier to remediate than former dry cleaners, and any type of solvent or chemical manufacturing plant.  The main issue with former gas stations is making sure surrounding receptors are not impacted.  The gasoline by-produts that are of concern are BTEX and MTBE, both of which can be treated with carbon.  Contaminants such as PCE and TCE, which are the after effects of dry cleaners are much more difficult to treat, as they don't break down in the manner that VOCs such as benzene and other gasoline by-products do.  Former gas stations are much easier to rehabilitate than so many other hazardous waste sites.
You still have to clean them up, though.  If I am looking for a location for a business, that added cost would make an old gas station less competitive.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

jas

Quote from: Rothman on August 27, 2021, 06:36:59 AM
Quote from: jas on August 27, 2021, 06:31:27 AM
I've worked in the envirnmental field, both as a technician and now a site manager for almost 30 years now, both in the provate and public sector.  While former gas stations are an environmental issue, since the contamination is mostly hydrocarbon-based, they are much easier to remediate than former dry cleaners, and any type of solvent or chemical manufacturing plant.  The main issue with former gas stations is making sure surrounding receptors are not impacted.  The gasoline by-produts that are of concern are BTEX and MTBE, both of which can be treated with carbon.  Contaminants such as PCE and TCE, which are the after effects of dry cleaners are much more difficult to treat, as they don't break down in the manner that VOCs such as benzene and other gasoline by-products do.  Former gas stations are much easier to rehabilitate than so many other hazardous waste sites.
You still have to clean them up, though.  If I am looking for a location for a business, that added cost would make an old gas station less competitive.
Money is the driving issue, but, I've worked on plenty of former gas stations that are now everything from fast food restaurants to banks to updated gas stations.  If a former gas station is located in what an owner thinks is a prime location, they consider the remediation just a part of the investment. 

SectorZ

Quote from: epzik8 on August 27, 2021, 02:28:15 AM
This ought to be a Reddit post

Assuming Kernals12 on reddit is the same person as on here, he takes a hell of a beating posting similar there as well.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: SectorZ on August 27, 2021, 08:11:05 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on August 27, 2021, 02:28:15 AM
This ought to be a Reddit post

Assuming Kernals12 on reddit is the same person as on here, he takes a hell of a beating posting similar there as well.

He is, let's just say that fact was well established early on during his tenure here. 

kphoger

Quote from: jas on August 27, 2021, 08:07:04 AM
If a former gas station is located in what an owner thinks is a prime location, they consider the remediation just a part of the investment. 

So...  I'm guessing a highway jughandle probably wouldn't be in the same category as a taco fusion restaurant, when it comes to profitability.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

StogieGuy7

Quote from: jas on August 27, 2021, 06:31:27 AM
I've worked in the envirnmental field, both as a technician and now a site manager for almost 30 years now, both in the provate and public sector.  While former gas stations are an environmental issue, since the contamination is mostly hydrocarbon-based, they are much easier to remediate than former dry cleaners, and any type of solvent or chemical manufacturing plant.  The main issue with former gas stations is making sure surrounding receptors are not impacted.  The gasoline by-produts that are of concern are BTEX and MTBE, both of which can be treated with carbon.  Contaminants such as PCE and TCE, which are the after effects of dry cleaners are much more difficult to treat, as they don't break down in the manner that VOCs such as benzene and other gasoline by-products do.  Former gas stations are much easier to rehabilitate than so many other hazardous waste sites.

All true. And yes, chlorinated solvents can require potentially millions of dollars to remediate from groundwater - and that process can take years. These site either end up being brownfields managed by the state or federal environmental agencies or they are in locations where the real estate is valuable enough to make it a worthwhile cost of doing business. However, we're talking specifically about former service station sites here - and these are often in locations where the proposed development may involve another not-so-high profit margin business enterprise.  So, it depends upon the site and what you plan to do with it. If contamination is allowed to remain, there will likely be use limitations imposed by the state agency overseeing the case. If it's merely old hydrocarbons sitting there, natural attenuation could be your best friend. But you make a great point about those supposedly "environment friendly" gasoline additives actually being the worst constituents to deal with when there's a release of gasoline to the subsurface.

Occidental Tourist

Quote from: kernals12 on August 24, 2021, 07:37:24 PM
And this gives a golden opportunity for road engineers.


Yes, in retrofitting gas stations into hydrogen refueling stations.

kphoger

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on September 01, 2021, 02:12:18 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on August 24, 2021, 07:37:24 PM
And this gives a golden opportunity for road engineers.

Yes, in retrofitting gas stations into hydrogen refueling stations.

I don't think road engineers do that.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.


jas

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 27, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jas on August 27, 2021, 06:31:27 AM
I've worked in the envirnmental field, both as a technician and now a site manager for almost 30 years now, both in the provate and public sector.  While former gas stations are an environmental issue, since the contamination is mostly hydrocarbon-based, they are much easier to remediate than former dry cleaners, and any type of solvent or chemical manufacturing plant.  The main issue with former gas stations is making sure surrounding receptors are not impacted.  The gasoline by-produts that are of concern are BTEX and MTBE, both of which can be treated with carbon.  Contaminants such as PCE and TCE, which are the after effects of dry cleaners are much more difficult to treat, as they don't break down in the manner that VOCs such as benzene and other gasoline by-products do.  Former gas stations are much easier to rehabilitate than so many other hazardous waste sites.

All true. And yes, chlorinated solvents can require potentially millions of dollars to remediate from groundwater - and that process can take years. These site either end up being brownfields managed by the state or federal environmental agencies or they are in locations where the real estate is valuable enough to make it a worthwhile cost of doing business. However, we're talking specifically about former service station sites here - and these are often in locations where the proposed development may involve another not-so-high profit margin business enterprise.  So, it depends upon the site and what you plan to do with it. If contamination is allowed to remain, there will likely be use limitations imposed by the state agency overseeing the case. If it's merely old hydrocarbons sitting there, natural attenuation could be your best friend. But you make a great point about those supposedly "environment friendly" gasoline additives actually being the worst constituents to deal with when there's a release of gasoline to the subsurface.

I forgot to mention natural attenuation as a possibility.  Good catch.  Many times you will see large corporate companies, especially those related to the gasoline industry, take on these sites.   In my area, that means the likes of Wawa or QuickChek, which will put up gas station/convenience store combos.  Other former gas station sites now house the likes of Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts or banks.

skluth

One former St Louis gas station was converted into a gay bar (JJ's at Vandeventer and Market). The old garage with its high ceiling was perfect for the dance floor. The bar recently closed as the owner is retiring and sold the building for a hefty profit as the neighborhood has gentrified.

HighwayStar

Yeah no, the electric car will take a long time to really replace the existing fleet. And while you may have a charger at home, you will need more chargers to get anywhere far. The electric car is not yet practical as a road trip vehicle. (that day will come when an electric vehicle holds the Cannonball Title)

And then we get into the REAL crux. As electric cars become more common, and liquid fuel cars less so, what will that do to demand? Shift right, and shift left respectively. Which means electric vehicles become more expensive, and gas gets cheaper.

As has been pointed out, gas stations barely make money on gas. Granted, the viability as a C store likely depends on fuel stops as part of the model, but I suspect many can use charging stations for the same purpose.

As to NJ and the jug handle, NJ roads are some of the worst in the country, none of us want to copy their system. The Jug-handle is not an all bad idea, but because it is not consistently implemented it becomes a nightmare to anyone not familiar with the area as you never know if you need to be in the left or right lane. My guess is it is not going far.

Instead, lets mandate the Texas U turn system on all new freeways nationally, and on all recon projects.
There are those who travel, and those who travel well

HighwayStar

Quote from: kernals12 on August 25, 2021, 10:31:46 AM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on August 25, 2021, 10:15:06 AM
Back some 5 years ago here in Central Carolina, former gas station locations (and other similar size parcels) were being converted into triplex shoppes (typically mattress store + bigname cell phone dealer + coffee shop, often Starbucks).  The mattress business collapsed before COVID, and since then the expansion of Starbucks came to a halt.   There are a few of the gas stations around here that didn't survive this year's price increases, but they just simply pulled out the pumps and are continuing with their secondary businesses (one is a mechanic shop, another is a U-Haul rental; another deals in farm supplies but is still selling gasoline).

But electric cars require much less maintenance so the need for mechanics will fall.

Eh wait and see. Electric cars are going to require service as well, right now they appear to need less because so many are new and are sold as luxury vehicles. A Mercedes requires little in the first 50K too, but that does not mean their long term prospects are much better. With one exception every part I have had to fix on my car in its life is common to Electric cars as well...
There are those who travel, and those who travel well

Scott5114

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
Yeah no, the electric car will take a long time to really replace the existing fleet. And while you may have a charger at home, you will need more chargers to get anywhere far. The electric car is not yet practical as a road trip vehicle. (that day will come when an electric vehicle holds the Cannonball Title)

Most people not on this forum don't drive far from home on a regular enough basis for that to be an overriding concern. The day-to-day for most people is their commute into work, and maybe a few stops at stores and such on the way home or over the weekend. Long road trips are, for most families, limited to seeing the family over the holidays and maybe a summer vacation. For either of those, renting an ICE car is feasible. There is a small minority of people who like to regularly travel place like national parks on the weekend, and an ICE vehicle will continue to make sense for them until infrastructure improves.

My primary work site is a lengthy commute by most people's standards, 20 miles one way, but an electric car could handle that easily without charging mid-day. Then if I want to take a long road trip I could either use my wife's ICE car or rent one.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

HighwayStar

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 15, 2021, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
Yeah no, the electric car will take a long time to really replace the existing fleet. And while you may have a charger at home, you will need more chargers to get anywhere far. The electric car is not yet practical as a road trip vehicle. (that day will come when an electric vehicle holds the Cannonball Title)

Most people not on this forum don't drive far from home on a regular enough basis for that to be an overriding concern. The day-to-day for most people is their commute into work, and maybe a few stops at stores and such on the way home or over the weekend. Long road trips are, for most families, limited to seeing the family over the holidays and maybe a summer vacation. For either of those, renting an ICE car is feasible. There is a small minority of people who like to regularly travel place like national parks on the weekend, and an ICE vehicle will continue to make sense for them until infrastructure improves.

My primary work site is a lengthy commute by most people's standards, 20 miles one way, but an electric car could handle that easily without charging mid-day. Then if I want to take a long road trip I could either use my wife's ICE car or rent one.

You think we are the only people that do road trips? Sure we are more enthusiastic than most, but a very large portion of the country does several drives a year too long to be reasonably accommodated by an electric car.
And people are not going to rent a car several times a year every time they need a trip. They want a car that they can get out of their garage and go.
Your later scenario is much more realistic, families have multiple cars and use one for road trips. But even that will take many years, and will begin to suffer the price-demand relationship I alluded to as well.
There are those who travel, and those who travel well

Scott5114

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 15, 2021, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
Yeah no, the electric car will take a long time to really replace the existing fleet. And while you may have a charger at home, you will need more chargers to get anywhere far. The electric car is not yet practical as a road trip vehicle. (that day will come when an electric vehicle holds the Cannonball Title)

Most people not on this forum don't drive far from home on a regular enough basis for that to be an overriding concern. The day-to-day for most people is their commute into work, and maybe a few stops at stores and such on the way home or over the weekend. Long road trips are, for most families, limited to seeing the family over the holidays and maybe a summer vacation. For either of those, renting an ICE car is feasible. There is a small minority of people who like to regularly travel place like national parks on the weekend, and an ICE vehicle will continue to make sense for them until infrastructure improves.

My primary work site is a lengthy commute by most people's standards, 20 miles one way, but an electric car could handle that easily without charging mid-day. Then if I want to take a long road trip I could either use my wife's ICE car or rent one.

You think we are the only people that do road trips? Sure we are more enthusiastic than most, but a very large portion of the country does several drives a year too long to be reasonably accommodated by an electric car.

Bullshit. Ask your coworkers when the last time they did a 240-mile round trip was. I'd be surprised if you got more than one or two that did one more than once or twice a year.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

HighwayStar

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 15, 2021, 06:28:14 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 15, 2021, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
Yeah no, the electric car will take a long time to really replace the existing fleet. And while you may have a charger at home, you will need more chargers to get anywhere far. The electric car is not yet practical as a road trip vehicle. (that day will come when an electric vehicle holds the Cannonball Title)

Most people not on this forum don't drive far from home on a regular enough basis for that to be an overriding concern. The day-to-day for most people is their commute into work, and maybe a few stops at stores and such on the way home or over the weekend. Long road trips are, for most families, limited to seeing the family over the holidays and maybe a summer vacation. For either of those, renting an ICE car is feasible. There is a small minority of people who like to regularly travel place like national parks on the weekend, and an ICE vehicle will continue to make sense for them until infrastructure improves.

My primary work site is a lengthy commute by most people's standards, 20 miles one way, but an electric car could handle that easily without charging mid-day. Then if I want to take a long road trip I could either use my wife's ICE car or rent one.

You think we are the only people that do road trips? Sure we are more enthusiastic than most, but a very large portion of the country does several drives a year too long to be reasonably accommodated by an electric car.

Bullshit. Ask your coworkers when the last time they did a 240-mile round trip was. I'd be surprised if you got more than one or two that did one more than once or twice a year.

Coworkers, friends, yep most of them are doing trips at least that long. Hell one did one a couple weeks ago just for a football game. And people are not going to buy a car that is going to lock them into renting to leave their own town, not going to happen on any large scale.
There are those who travel, and those who travel well

1995hoo

#43
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 15, 2021, 05:57:07 PM
.... For either of those, renting an ICE car is feasible. ....

While I recognize the validity of this statement, my problem with it is that the cost of any EV seriously worth considering ($50,000 and up, not including home charging equipment plus installation) is steep enough that I think it's legitimate to want to be able use that car for substantially everything, including travel.

(Edited to add: BTW, obviously I think it's reasonable to expect that, other than perhaps the most hard-core EV supporters or greenies, most people buying an EV are likely to have an ICE vehicle available–e.g., if I had to replace my car and I got an EV, we'd still have my wife's two ICE vehicles available, and we already her TLX for roadtrips. I get that as a practical matter, but there's just something that would stick in my craw about the idea of a $50,000 vehicle that I can't use for longer drives. I also suspect that using an EV might put a crimp in my desire to get off the Interstate and take other routes, such as using Corridor H through West Virginia for trips in that direction. The mountains already sap your EV's range, and access to charging points would be a further issue because I suspect those sorts of roads will wait a lot longer to have sufficient charging stations.)

Those of you interested in the practicality of EV travel ought to read the most recent issue of Car and Driver; the cover story is "EV of the Year" and one of the stories involves an EV race they staged in rally format over 1000 miles ("rally format" denoting there were certain mandatory checkpoints, but otherwise the drivers were free to choose their routes). One segment between Cincinnati and Morgantown was substantially off-Interstate to help make it more complicated. Access to charging points was, of course, a major issue. Pretty interesting read. Their conclusion: Unless you have access to Tesla Superchargers, use an ICE vehicle for long trips. (That makes it all the more interesting to find out whether the reports that Tesla will open the Superchargers to other brands are true and, if so, what the cost will be to use them.)
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Ned Weasel

#44
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
As to NJ and the jug handle, NJ roads are some of the worst in the country, none of us want to copy their system. The Jug-handle is not an all bad idea, but because it is not consistently implemented it becomes a nightmare to anyone not familiar with the area as you never know if you need to be in the left or right lane. My guess is it is not going far.

This is such a dumb thing to say.  It's almost as if you've never driven in New Jersey and never seen the "ALL TURNS FROM RIGHT LANE" signs that they place well in advance of intersections using jughandles.  Not to mention that NJDOT's method of signing jughandles is so clear and informative that it became the MUTCD standard in 2009.

Quote
Instead, lets mandate the Texas U turn system on all new freeways nationally, and on all recon projects.

That's another dumb thing to say.  While there's nothing inherently wrong with the Texas turnaround system, it's wasteful and impractical to mandate that all new and reconstructed freeways have it.  Have you ever noticed that not all freeways have frontage roads?  Have you ever noticed how much space it takes to add frontage roads to a freeway?
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

Rick Powell

There are intended and unintended consequences of EVs replacing the ICE fleet and as it relates to C-stores, I see the following.
1. EVs take much longer to charge at present than ICE vehicles, so even if 90% of charging will be at home, the total dwell time of vehicles (and people) at a C-store equipped with chargers may be equal or longer than now, presenting more opportunities for C-stores to sell their other stuff.
2. If EV charging time improves to say 5 minutes for an 80% charge, a substantial % of people will trade the cheapness of charging at home with the convenience of charging on the spot, thus replicating the current ICE model and bringing more EVs into the C-store that otherwise would have bypassed it for a refueling under the current 90% home charging EV model.
3. If the demise of ICEs means the demise of C-stores, why the emerging trend of refueling "palaces" like Buc-ees and Wally's? Surely they have a long-term view that is more informed than ours.
4. There is a natural consolidation of fossil fuel stations going on because of improved fuel economy and the loss of service business attached to gas stations. This has been going on for a few decades. In my current city, in the 1970s there were over 20 places with a fuel pump, and there are less than 10 now. All the mom and pop places are gone, no repair garages sell fuel, and every place with a fuel pump has a C-store of some size. Ironically, with "destination chargers" as well as higher powered superchargers, there may be MORE charging opportunities and chances to draw customers in with an EV future than today. granted, hotels restaurants and shopping malls are more of a likely target than C-stores.

vdeane

Quote from: Rick Powell on September 17, 2021, 10:02:00 AM
There are intended and unintended consequences of EVs replacing the ICE fleet and as it relates to C-stores, I see the following.
1. EVs take much longer to charge at present than ICE vehicles, so even if 90% of charging will be at home, the total dwell time of vehicles (and people) at a C-store equipped with chargers may be equal or longer than now, presenting more opportunities for C-stores to sell their other stuff.
2. If EV charging time improves to say 5 minutes for an 80% charge, a substantial % of people will trade the cheapness of charging at home with the convenience of charging on the spot, thus replicating the current ICE model and bringing more EVs into the C-store that otherwise would have bypassed it for a refueling under the current 90% home charging EV model.
3. If the demise of ICEs means the demise of C-stores, why the emerging trend of refueling "palaces" like Buc-ees and Wally's? Surely they have a long-term view that is more informed than ours.
4. There is a natural consolidation of fossil fuel stations going on because of improved fuel economy and the loss of service business attached to gas stations. This has been going on for a few decades. In my current city, in the 1970s there were over 20 places with a fuel pump, and there are less than 10 now. All the mom and pop places are gone, no repair garages sell fuel, and every place with a fuel pump has a C-store of some size. Ironically, with "destination chargers" as well as higher powered superchargers, there may be MORE charging opportunities and chances to draw customers in with an EV future than today. granted, hotels restaurants and shopping malls are more of a likely target than C-stores.
1. I would think this would lead to more Sheetz-type stores with nice restrooms, food you can eat for lunch, and seating over the current model of a few snacks and maybe a single-stall restroom.  Stuff like this I don't see surviving.
2. Probably not.  Remember, home charging is just "plug in when you get home, it's ready when you leave the next day".  That's more convenient than stopping somewhere for even 5 minutes, especially since you can time it to charge whenever you want to whatever percentage (usually ~80%, more wears out the battery so people don't do it unless they'll need the range the next day) and the car is going to lose some charge overnight regardless.  Batteries are not like gas takes - they don't stay at the same level regardless of how long you sit as long as you don't drive.

Quote from: Ned Weasel on September 17, 2021, 06:42:02 AM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
As to NJ and the jug handle, NJ roads are some of the worst in the country, none of us want to copy their system. The Jug-handle is not an all bad idea, but because it is not consistently implemented it becomes a nightmare to anyone not familiar with the area as you never know if you need to be in the left or right lane. My guess is it is not going far.

This is such a dumb thing to say.  It's almost as if you've never driven in New Jersey and never seen the "ALL TURNS FROM RIGHT LANE" signs that they place well in advance of intersections using jughandles.  Not to mention that NJDOT's method of signing jughandles is so clear and informative that it became the MUTCD standard in 2009.

Quote
Instead, lets mandate the Texas U turn system on all new freeways nationally, and on all recon projects.

That's another dumb thing to say.  While there's nothing inherently wrong with the Texas turnaround system, it's wasteful and impractical to mandate that all new and reconstructed freeways have it.  Have you ever noticed that not all freeways have frontage roads?  Have you ever noticed how much space it takes to add frontage roads to a freeway?
Regarding jughandles, those tend to be on multi-lane roads, so if you're in the left lane and see "all turns from right lane", you'll need to move over pretty quick.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Ned Weasel on September 17, 2021, 06:42:02 AM
Quote from: HighwayStar on September 15, 2021, 04:01:54 PM
As to NJ and the jug handle, NJ roads are some of the worst in the country, none of us want to copy their system. The Jug-handle is not an all bad idea, but because it is not consistently implemented it becomes a nightmare to anyone not familiar with the area as you never know if you need to be in the left or right lane. My guess is it is not going far.

This is such a dumb thing to say.  It's almost as if you've never driven in New Jersey and never seen the "ALL TURNS FROM RIGHT LANE" signs that they place well in advance of intersections using jughandles.  Not to mention that NJDOT's method of signing jughandles is so clear and informative that it became the MUTCD standard in 2009.

The jughandle is a good thing, but highwaystar is correct in that it's not consistently implemented.

To give you an example, On NJ 73 from I-295 to US 30, there's a few dozen controlled intersections, and any one of them could be forward jughandles, aft-jughandles, or traditional left turn lanes.  Signage for jughandles are often off the right shoulder, not the left, so someone in the left lane can easily miss that signage if another vehicle obstructs it.  The signage is often just prior to the exit point, such as https://goo.gl/maps/pahVJaG4EFJpnPko9 which is 700 feet prior to the jughandle, or https://goo.gl/maps/jSk1KwQ2axU8JWYAA , which is 400 feet prior to the jughandle. 

There's usually no signage when a left turn can be made from the left turn channels, so someone approaching an intersection in the right lane may not be aware there won't be a jughandle.

In some instances, there may be a jughandle when traveling one direction, but a left turn slot going the opposite direction (Fellowship Road, between 295 & the NJ Turnpike, has this feature).

And, don't forget to add in the usual mix of RIROs, driveways, left turns at uncontrolled intersections, and intersections that don't have any means of making left or u-turns.

So, yeah, NJDOT often does a good job of utilizing jughandles.  Their standard of signing intersections though on some roadways, especially along roadways where there's no consistency, is subpar at best.

Ned Weasel

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 17, 2021, 02:17:22 PM
The jughandle is a good thing, but highwaystar is correct in that it's not consistently implemented.

To give you an example, On NJ 73 from I-295 to US 30, there's a few dozen controlled intersections, and any one of them could be forward jughandles, aft-jughandles, or traditional left turn lanes.  Signage for jughandles are often off the right shoulder, not the left, so someone in the left lane can easily miss that signage if another vehicle obstructs it.  The signage is often just prior to the exit point, such as https://goo.gl/maps/pahVJaG4EFJpnPko9 which is 700 feet prior to the jughandle, or https://goo.gl/maps/jSk1KwQ2axU8JWYAA , which is 400 feet prior to the jughandle. 

There's usually no signage when a left turn can be made from the left turn channels, so someone approaching an intersection in the right lane may not be aware there won't be a jughandle.

In some instances, there may be a jughandle when traveling one direction, but a left turn slot going the opposite direction (Fellowship Road, between 295 & the NJ Turnpike, has this feature).

And, don't forget to add in the usual mix of RIROs, driveways, left turns at uncontrolled intersections, and intersections that don't have any means of making left or u-turns.

So, yeah, NJDOT often does a good job of utilizing jughandles.  Their standard of signing intersections though on some roadways, especially along roadways where there's no consistency, is subpar at best.

I see the issue, but is it really a huge problem?  When giving directions, would someone normally just say "Turn left on Bob Road" when there's a jughandle, as opposed to saying "Take the jughandle for Bob Road and turn left"?  When using a GPS, it would normally say something like, "Turn slight-right at Bob Road Access and then turn left."  If you're reading a zoomed-in map, it should show where the jughandles are, although, granted, it typically won't show left turn prohibitions.  If you're reading a zoomed-out map, then yeah, I can see situations arise where one might wonder, "Is there a jughandle for Bob Road, or is it a conventional left turn?"  But the nice thing about arterial highways in New Jersey is that there are tons of convenient, well signed U-turns (via jughandles, ramps, or even median crossings), so you should be able to find your way back around in case you miss a turn.  This is something I've found severely lacking in most states that aren't New Jersey and Michigan.

At any rate, sure, it's not a perfect system, but I appreciate the thoughtful solution to the problem.  And moreover, saying "NJ roads are some of the worst in the country" is totally bogus for anyone actually paying attention.  Sure, there are some blemishes here and there, but same goes for roads in every state.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee." - Strong Bad imitating Homsar

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

Scott5114

Quote from: Ned Weasel on September 17, 2021, 06:42:02 AM
While there's nothing inherently wrong with the Texas turnaround system, it's wasteful and impractical to mandate that all new and reconstructed freeways have it.  Have you ever noticed that not all freeways have frontage roads?  Have you ever noticed how much space it takes to add frontage roads to a freeway?

I think it would be reasonable to say that all new freeways with frontage roads should have one-way frontage roads with turnarounds, but leave the option of not building frontage roads on the table. Frontage roads do have a bunch of drawbacks in terms of the types of land use they tend to promote.

Quote from: vdeane on September 17, 2021, 12:50:05 PM
Quote from: Rick Powell on September 17, 2021, 10:02:00 AM
There are intended and unintended consequences of EVs replacing the ICE fleet and as it relates to C-stores, I see the following.
1. EVs take much longer to charge at present than ICE vehicles, so even if 90% of charging will be at home, the total dwell time of vehicles (and people) at a C-store equipped with chargers may be equal or longer than now, presenting more opportunities for C-stores to sell their other stuff.
[...]
3. If the demise of ICEs means the demise of C-stores, why the emerging trend of refueling "palaces" like Buc-ees and Wally's? Surely they have a long-term view that is more informed than ours.

1. I would think this would lead to more Sheetz-type stores with nice restrooms, food you can eat for lunch, and seating over the current model of a few snacks and maybe a single-stall restroom.  Stuff like this I don't see surviving.

This is exactly what I'm thinking–the small hole-in-the-wall 7-11s and such will go away and the market will tilt toward things like QuikTrip/OnCue/Sheetz/Wawa/Buc-ee's* because those offer some form of something to do while you're waiting for the charge.

You may even see Walmart/Target install chargers all over their lots so that they become an attractive place to make a pit stop. It's easy to kill time wandering around a Walmart or Target.



*Yeah, I just put OnCue in the same category as Sheetz/Wawa. Deal with it, Easterners.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.