AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Author Topic: New Jersey  (Read 997709 times)

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15811
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 41
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:45:18 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2250 on: March 11, 2019, 12:40:04 AM »

While snooping around the NJDOT's website, there's an ArcGIS map showing soil boring logs taken throughout the state by DOT.

https://njgin.state.nj.us/DOT_GDMS/

Boring you say? Yes but they also reveal what some of the cancelled freeways (e.g. I-95, I-895, northern extension to Route 31) would've looked like if you click on the purple boxes and look under boring plans.
Northern extension to Route 31? Boring is the opposite of this.

ixnay

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1309
  • Location: U.S. East Coast
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:36:38 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2251 on: March 11, 2019, 09:33:36 PM »

While snooping around the NJDOT's website, there's an ArcGIS map showing soil boring logs taken throughout the state by DOT.

https://njgin.state.nj.us/DOT_GDMS/

Boring you say? Yes but they also reveal what some of the cancelled freeways (e.g. I-95, I-895, northern extension to Route 31) would've looked like if you click on the purple boxes and look under boring plans.

I don't find that map boring at all (pun intended).  Though apparently they didn't do any boring along the Somerset Fwy. ROW north of CR 514.

ixnay
Logged
The Washington/Baltimore/Arlington CSA has two Key Bridges, a Minnesota Avenue, and a Mannasota Avenue.

civilmaher

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 42
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Central Florida
  • Last Login: March 06, 2024, 08:40:09 AM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2252 on: March 12, 2019, 09:18:02 AM »

While snooping around the NJDOT's website, there's an ArcGIS map showing soil boring logs taken throughout the state by DOT.

https://njgin.state.nj.us/DOT_GDMS/

Boring you say? Yes but they also reveal what some of the cancelled freeways (e.g. I-95, I-895, northern extension to Route 31) would've looked like if you click on the purple boxes and look under boring plans.

Wow! This is a treasure trove! I was always curious about the Route 92 and Route 895 freeway alignments and interchange layouts. Good stuff!
Logged
Opinions represent mine and no other organization that I am associated with.

wriddle082

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1594
  • Give 'em the BIDNESS!

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Anymetro, Carolinas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:04:15 AM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2253 on: March 27, 2019, 12:45:35 AM »

Ok so yesterday I drove the full length of the NJTP for the first time.

May I assume that all of the BGSs along the 95 duplex have been brought up to proper MUTCD standards due to pressure from the Feds now that 95 has a clear and defined route through central NJ?  It seems like the only old school signs left are south of 95 along the old 4-lane section.
Logged

famartin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1101
  • Location: Trenton NJ area
  • Last Login: December 24, 2023, 11:01:16 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2254 on: March 27, 2019, 12:59:40 AM »

Ok so yesterday I drove the full length of the NJTP for the first time.

May I assume that all of the BGSs along the 95 duplex have been brought up to proper MUTCD standards due to pressure from the Feds now that 95 has a clear and defined route through central NJ?  It seems like the only old school signs left are south of 95 along the old 4-lane section.

That would actually be news. Last fall, several pull throughs south of Exit 9 were still missing 95 shields and some still said “thru traffic, next exit xx miles” ...
Logged

PHLBOS

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7391
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Greater Philly, PA
  • Last Login: February 02, 2024, 08:18:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2255 on: March 27, 2019, 09:06:49 AM »

Last fall Christmas, several pull throughs south of Exit 9 were still missing 95 shields and some still said “thru traffic, next exit xx miles” ...
FTFY. 

Those newer 95* NJTP SOUTH THRU TRAFFIC NEXT EXIT XX MILES predated NJTA's changeover to more MUTCD-style signage.  Such are allowed to remain until the next sign replacement project way down the road (no pun intended).

*Such signage was designed to accommodate I-95 shields that should've long since been added by now.

I will be using that stretch this coming weekend so I will be able to verify if such sign retrofits have since taken place.
Logged
GPS does NOT equal GOD

ekt8750

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 542
  • Location: SE Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: October 04, 2022, 11:27:52 AM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2256 on: March 27, 2019, 10:37:51 AM »

I was up that way a couple weeks ago. I noticed more than a few TO I-95 shields on the right shoulders approaching Exit 6 that looked like they were recently installed.
Logged

PHLBOS

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7391
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Greater Philly, PA
  • Last Login: February 02, 2024, 08:18:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2257 on: March 27, 2019, 11:04:50 AM »

Most here are more interested any I-95 related signage updates/mods between Exits 7 & 8A. 

The split-ramp signage beyond the Turnpike Connector/US 130 tollbooths may still not have I-95 shields added on yet either.
Logged
GPS does NOT equal GOD

ekt8750

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 542
  • Location: SE Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: October 04, 2022, 11:27:52 AM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2258 on: March 27, 2019, 11:40:07 AM »

Most here are more interested any I-95 related signage updates/mods between Exits 7 & 8A. 

The split-ramp signage beyond the Turnpike Connector/US 130 tollbooths may still not have I-95 shields added on yet either.

I saw a few of those NB as well.
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15811
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 41
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:45:18 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2259 on: March 27, 2019, 11:53:33 AM »

Ok so yesterday I drove the full length of the NJTP for the first time.

May I assume that all of the BGSs along the 95 duplex have been brought up to proper MUTCD standards due to pressure from the Feds now that 95 has a clear and defined route through central NJ?  It seems like the only old school signs left are south of 95 along the old 4-lane section.

No pressure from feds. A desire to maximize conformance now so that the feds never come to NJDOT and say "you better get your sibling in line or else."

signalman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1039
  • It's not the destination, but the trip to/from it

  • Age: 43
  • Location: North Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 08:49:37 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2260 on: March 28, 2019, 08:31:07 AM »

Ok so yesterday I drove the full length of the NJTP for the first time.

May I assume that all of the BGSs along the 95 duplex have been brought up to proper MUTCD standards due to pressure from the Feds now that 95 has a clear and defined route through central NJ?  It seems like the only old school signs left are south of 95 along the old 4-lane section.

No pressure from feds. A desire to maximize conformance now so that the feds never come to NJDOT and say "you better get your sibling in line or else."
Is the Turnpike Authority doing this on their own in an effort to be proactive, or is there some pressure from NJDOT?

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8478
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:22:35 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2261 on: March 28, 2019, 09:44:23 AM »

While snooping around the NJDOT's website, there's an ArcGIS map showing soil boring logs taken throughout the state by DOT.

https://njgin.state.nj.us/DOT_GDMS/

Boring you say? Yes but they also reveal what some of the cancelled freeways (e.g. I-95, I-895, northern extension to Route 31) would've looked like if you click on the purple boxes and look under boring plans.

Wow! This is a treasure trove! I was always curious about the Route 92 and Route 895 freeway alignments and interchange layouts. Good stuff!
That does sound interesting, to see how the freeways would've looked like had they been built.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

PHLBOS

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7391
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Greater Philly, PA
  • Last Login: February 02, 2024, 08:18:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2262 on: April 01, 2019, 09:22:18 AM »

NJ-related info. cross-posted from the I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange thread.

During a recent weekend trip to/from Massachusetts, I noticed the following sign changes/additions:

1.  The US 13 shield on this BGS is already peeling at the top.  A sliver of the upper-right portion is now missing.

2.  Along the I-95/NJ Turnpike mainline; a new, stacked SOUTH 95 NJTP reassurance marker assembly has been erected to the right of the outer/truck lanes around MM 65... north of Exit 7A (I-195) & roughly 6 miles north of the Richard Stockton Service Area.

No other I-95 shields have been added to NJTP BGS' since.
Logged
GPS does NOT equal GOD

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15886
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:37:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2263 on: April 02, 2019, 10:25:07 PM »

Does anyone know why NJDOT closed the SB I-287 on ramp from Smith Road in Parsippany- Troy Hills?  To me I saw it as no safety issue as it merged quite well with the WB I-80 to SB I-287 ramp and of course now its replacement is the US  202 entrance to I-287 SB just north of US 46 which makes it more difficult for those on EB US 46 to access I-287 S Bound as now they have to use the reverse jughandle to US 202 NB and then cross over US 46 at grade and loop around from 202 to cross back over US 46 on the freeway itself.  The Smith Road entrance allowed Route 46 access to I-287 SB that was pretty straight forward.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15811
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 41
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:45:18 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2264 on: April 02, 2019, 10:29:32 PM »

Does anyone know why NJDOT closed the SB I-287 on ramp from Smith Road in Parsippany- Troy Hills?  To me I saw it as no safety issue.
And to engineers and the public, a left-hand entrance with very little merging room is a safety issue. I mean, to each his own.

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15886
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:37:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2265 on: April 02, 2019, 11:20:43 PM »

I kind of figured that but I thought they would have at least extended that merge when the ramps were redone into that long left side road to prevent the weaving at CR 511.  To me I had no problems then, but the average person does not drive as careful as most of us here on the forum.  It could be me not having a problem too with short merges and not thinking about it being an issue too.

Then again we both know NJ is got a problem with money in the budget for roads hence US 9 not being widened as it should in South Jersey and NJ 31 being two lanes still where it needs at least 4.  Not arguing that one out, as I know they are doing the best they can, unless you know they are not. 
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1815
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:30:29 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2266 on: April 03, 2019, 06:26:54 PM »

The space where that ramp was has since be taken up by a reconstructed loop ramp.
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • Age: 49
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:52:41 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2267 on: April 03, 2019, 10:27:06 PM »

I kind of figured that but I thought they would have at least extended that merge when the ramps were redone into that long left side road to prevent the weaving at CR 511.  To me I had no problems then, but the average person does not drive as careful as most of us here on the forum.  It could be me not having a problem too with short merges and not thinking about it being an issue too.

Then again we both know NJ is got a problem with money in the budget for roads hence US 9 not being widened as it should in South Jersey and NJ 31 being two lanes still where it needs at least 4.  Not arguing that one out, as I know they are doing the best they can, unless you know they are not. 

Generally speaking, many towns simply don't want roads widened that need to be widened.  NJDOT's budget is well over $2 Billion, so it's not that there's no money; it's just allocated to other projects worth pursuing.
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15811
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 41
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:45:18 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2268 on: April 03, 2019, 11:33:03 PM »

I kind of figured that but I thought they would have at least extended that merge when the ramps were redone into that long left side road to prevent the weaving at CR 511.  To me I had no problems then, but the average person does not drive as careful as most of us here on the forum.  It could be me not having a problem too with short merges and not thinking about it being an issue too.

Then again we both know NJ is got a problem with money in the budget for roads hence US 9 not being widened as it should in South Jersey and NJ 31 being two lanes still where it needs at least 4.  Not arguing that one out, as I know they are doing the best they can, unless you know they are not. 

Generally speaking, many towns simply don't want roads widened that need to be widened.  NJDOT's budget is well over $2 Billion, so it's not that there's no money; it's just allocated to other projects worth pursuing.

Even $5 billion wouldn't be enough for the projects that are out there.

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • Age: 49
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:52:41 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2269 on: April 04, 2019, 03:13:07 PM »

There is a God.

15 years overdue from the original planned date...this finally appears in NJDOT's 6 Month Advanced Construction Schedule: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/

Quote
UPC #950541
Rt 295 & 42 Study A (Missing Moves)

This project will provide the missing moves of Rt. 42 NB to I-295 SB and I-295 NB to Rt. 42 SB. The preferred alternative (providing the missing moves through the construction of direct ramps connecting I-295 and Rt. 42) has been shifted northerly to eliminate impacts to a proposed development.

Proposed Advertised Month August, 2019

Project Details
Camden, Gloucester Counties/Bellmawr Boro, Westville Boro, Deptford Twp

MP  25.07-26.35
      12.57-13.90

Estimate Range  over $100,000,000
Logged

famartin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1101
  • Location: Trenton NJ area
  • Last Login: December 24, 2023, 11:01:16 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2270 on: April 04, 2019, 03:30:23 PM »

Fixed  :-D
There is a God.

15 60 years overdue from the original planned date when they should've done it in the first place...this finally appears in NJDOT's 6 Month Advanced Construction Schedule: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/

Quote
UPC #950541
Rt 295 & 42 Study A (Missing Moves)

This project will provide the missing moves of Rt. 42 NB to I-295 SB and I-295 NB to Rt. 42 SB. The preferred alternative (providing the missing moves through the construction of direct ramps connecting I-295 and Rt. 42) has been shifted northerly to eliminate impacts to a proposed development.

Proposed Advertised Month August, 2019

Project Details
Camden, Gloucester Counties/Bellmawr Boro, Westville Boro, Deptford Twp

MP  25.07-26.35
      12.57-13.90

Estimate Range  over $100,000,000
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15811
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 41
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 09:45:18 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2271 on: April 04, 2019, 06:00:05 PM »

Fixed  :-D
There is a God.

15 60 years overdue from the original planned date when they should've done it in the first place...this finally appears in NJDOT's 6 Month Advanced Construction Schedule: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/

Quote
UPC #950541
Rt 295 & 42 Study A (Missing Moves)

This project will provide the missing moves of Rt. 42 NB to I-295 SB and I-295 NB to Rt. 42 SB. The preferred alternative (providing the missing moves through the construction of direct ramps connecting I-295 and Rt. 42) has been shifted northerly to eliminate impacts to a proposed development.

Proposed Advertised Month August, 2019

Project Details
Camden, Gloucester Counties/Bellmawr Boro, Westville Boro, Deptford Twp

MP  25.07-26.35
      12.57-13.90

Estimate Range  over $100,000,000
I wonder if NJ 60 would have served the purpose instead.

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15886
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:37:30 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2272 on: April 04, 2019, 10:57:55 PM »

The space where that ramp was has since be taken up by a reconstructed loop ramp.
Yeah I saw that, so at least something of good use.  Plus I would have to guess not really that big a deal of traffic heading to I-287 S Bound anyway from Smith Road or US 46, so that reconfiguration is a better deal for motorists as going from I-80 W Bound to I-287 S Bound has far more use.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

BrianP

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 564
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 05:57:45 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2273 on: April 05, 2019, 10:31:54 AM »

I wonder if NJ 60 would have served the purpose instead.
NJ 60 would have served only a fraction of the purpose.  That route would not work for people who are destined for some place along I-295 or NJ 42/ACE.  Like I use the Blackwood exit off of NJ 42 to get to my parents house.  So NJ 60 wouldn't work for me when I'm going between there and the Del Mem Br. 
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • Age: 49
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: March 18, 2024, 10:52:41 PM
Re: New Jersey
« Reply #2274 on: April 05, 2019, 12:24:34 PM »

I wonder if NJ 60 would have served the purpose instead.
NJ 60 would have served only a fraction of the purpose.  That route would not work for people who are destined for some place along I-295 or NJ 42/ACE.  Like I use the Blackwood exit off of NJ 42 to get to my parents house.  So NJ 60 wouldn't work for me when I'm going between there and the Del Mem Br. 

Agreed.  That road might've been useful for people going to/from Delaware and points south, but this new ramp will prove extremely useful for those already in the region near 295 and 42.

Heck, where I live along 295, I can get to many areas along Route 42 faster via 295 (compared to taking the local roads) by taking 295 North to 76 West, making the U-turn at Market Street and taking 76 East to 42 South. This new ramp will cut out about 5 minutes of that drive alone, making the local drives much, much quicker for me!

With all the road diets, bicycle lanes, and broken traffic light sensors in the area, it would seem that they are trying to push traffic to the highways rather than using the local roads.
Logged

 


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.