New Jersey

[02 Park Ave]

Local school districts should be merged into county-wide dictricts.

[Pete from Boston]

Local school districts should be merged into county-wide dictricts.

This is where you might run into the most opposition of all.  We're talking about counties of half a million to a million that have some excellent (and some very bad) school systems.  The residents of the former are not going to just roll over and be folded in with the latter.

Can you imagine Cherry Hill and Collingswood agreeing to be part of a school district with Camden?

School districts were one of the primary causes of "boroughitis" (the 1890s explosion of municipal fragmentation in New Jersey).  Poor farmers didn't want higher taxes to pay for burgeoning school, light, water, etc. districts in growing villages in their townships.  Ironically, many of the seceded areas grew urbanized, duplicated those districts, and helped create the epidemic of bureaucracy New Jersey has today.

[roadman65]

What is up with the "To I-287" shields on the NJ 24 Westbound Exit 48 guide signs?  Yes I know that NJ 24 terminates at that particular interstate so it does go to it as the sign states, but what about those heading for I-287 Southbound to Somerville?  For southbound I-287 is would be better to stay on I-78 another 18 miles to the point where both routes properly intersect.

Who ever was the one who made the decision to place that shield on all the guides, did not do his homework on that one.  Plus the overhead on the CR 577 overpass is right next to a mileage sign listing I-287 as a control point as well.  That should have been a clue there.

[storm2k]

What is up with the "To I-287" shields on the NJ 24 Westbound Exit 48 guide signs?  Yes I know that NJ 24 terminates at that particular interstate so it does go to it as the sign states, but what about those heading for I-287 Southbound to Somerville?  For southbound I-287 is would be better to stay on I-78 another 18 miles to the point where both routes properly intersect.

Who ever was the one who made the decision to place that shield on all the guides, did not do his homework on that one.  Plus the overhead on the CR 577 overpass is right next to a mileage sign listing I-287 as a control point as well.  That should have been a clue there.

It would make more sense to post it as to 287 NB and then have a sign to indicate that traffic towards 287 SB stay on 78, but that's how the cookie crumbles. By the same token, when they widened the ramp from 287 SB to 24 EB to 2 lanes, they changed the signs to include a To 78 shield, even though it only makes sense if you want to get to 78 EB and should stay on 287 to reach 78 WB. That would cause a lot of confusion I think.

[roadman65]

Yeah it would be more practical to just say "TO I-287 NORTH" from I-78 West.  Also by the same token to say TO I-78 EAST" from I-287 South as well.

We got the same issues here in Florida along FL 429 SB at the Florida Turnpike with an I-4 shield directing motorists to use the Tpk Southbound to reach it as it was posted before FL 429 was completed to terminate at I-4 near Disney.  This sign should be I-4 EAST since to get to I-4 West to Lakeland and Tampa is best (and direct as the road you are on is doing it) to stay on FL 429.

[hubcity]

Yeah it would be more practical to just say "TO I-287 NORTH" from I-78 West.  Also by the same token to say TO I-78 EAST" from I-287 South as well.

Seems to me that if you're taking I-78 westbound from Newark/Irvington, you're far less likely to be heading for any destination reachable from I-78's intersection with I-287, since from that point, I-287 goes either northeast or southeast, and you'll have gone west to go east(ish).  You're more likely to have exited before that point to get wherever you want to go. Even if you want to go to Bridgewater, US 22's a better option (generally.)

If you're heading for I-287 via NJ 24, however, you may be heading north to Parsippany or Oakland, or south to Morristown or Bedminster. For the westbound traveler, it's a more useful intersection with I-287.

I think I agree with the current signing, because it's the best way to get to the intersection with I-287 that you'd actually want to get to.

[roadman65]

I think you are wrong.  Many people from Newark/Irvington/ Maplewood do work in the Somerville/Bridgewater area.   And Bedminster is best served to stay on I-78 to I-287.  A "NORTH" only header would do fine in this application.

BTW Basking Ridge and Bernardsville are better served by commuters bound for them via Exits 36 and 33 later on.

[cpzilliacus]

Complete N.J. 55?

Cape May County Herald.com: Cape Issues: Can We Save Money and Also Be Safer?

Jespersen asked about other safety deficits Cape May County faces. Pagliughi said people need to evacuate early. In a big storm like Superstorm Sandy, both Route 47 and the Garden State Parkway had sections which we impassible due to floodwater covering the roads. He said that it is well known that Cape May County is one of the most difficult places to evacuate in a big storm. As the one responsible for the safety of the public in Cape May County, he stated that "the completion of Route 55 would simplify my life greatly."

He added that Route 55 requires forward movement on two issues; one is funding, and the other is environmental concerns. He suggested that the county address funding first. He proposed a toll road as the least problematic solution. After that, we could undertake environmental issues.

[jeffandnicole]

I saw that article, but it was about a low-level meeting as you're going to get.

Besides, the Garden State Parkway was impassible due to floodwaters.  Where's Route 55 always been proposed to go?  To the Garden State Parkway.

[cpzilliacus]

I saw that article, but it was about a low-level meeting as you're going to get.

So elected officials are not interested in this?

Besides, the Garden State Parkway was impassible due to floodwaters.  Where's Route 55 always been proposed to go?  To the Garden State Parkway.

Where did the waters of Sandy make the Parkway impassible?  North or south of where 55 was to connect to it?

[Alps]

I saw that article, but it was about a low-level meeting as you're going to get.

So elected officials are not interested in this?

Besides, the Garden State Parkway was impassible due to floodwaters.  Where's Route 55 always been proposed to go?  To the Garden State Parkway.

Where did the waters of Sandy make the Parkway impassible?  North or south of where 55 was to connect to it?

55 is a non-starter because of the environmental concerns, as badly as it's needed for shore traffic. I'd like to see 47 four-laned from the 55 junction to the 347 split and again from the 347 merge to the CR 657 split. That would at least relieve two chokepoints that lack alternate routes.

[jeffandnicole]

I saw that article, but it was about a low-level meeting as you're going to get.

So elected officials are not interested in this?

It's not that elected officials aren't interested in this...Lord knows the idea has been talked about for half a century now.  It's just for all the people and elected officials interested in getting the route completed, there's an equal number of people and elected officials interested in making sure the route never gets completed.  A politician in Cape May may say "Let's get construction started tomorrow".  A politician in Port Elizabeth, or any other town that the proposed highway may go thru, may say "You ain't putting that highway in my town". 

What's mostly interesting is that you're sure to get people that'll say they don't want the route because it'll bring increased development...when there's been a whole lot of increased development already, which makes an alternate route or widening of existing routes all the more needed. 

[PHLBOS]

Besides, the Garden State Parkway was impassible due to floodwaters.  Where's Route 55 always been proposed to go?  To the Garden State Parkway.

Where did the waters of Sandy make the Parkway impassible?  North or south of where 55 was to connect to it?

Was the portion of the Parkway that was made impassable due to floodwaters of Sandy the stretch that's at grade with intersections rather than interchanges (which is currently being raised and rebuilt as an expressway - those who attended last month's Cape May meet know such first-hand)?

What's mostly interesting is that you're sure to get people that'll say they don't want the route because it'll bring increased development...when there's been a whole lot of increased development already, which makes an alternate route or widening of existing routes all the more needed.

Such can be said for nearly every highway project that's been proposed but delayed and/or canned (at least in the Northeast) for the last 4-1/2 decades.  The highway construction being halted/idled but the development along existing corridors continues along regardless.

[Zeffy]

What's mostly interesting is that you're sure to get people that'll say they don't want the route because it'll bring increased development...when there's been a whole lot of increased development already, which makes an alternate route or widening of existing routes all the more needed.

But it's a freeway. A freeway can't really have development because it's a controlled access roadway. It's not like the situation with US 1 in Mercer and Middlesex Counties, where development exploded because it was left as-is. South of Millville, it's pretty rural, but still, it's a route for the shore traffic and the shore traffic is a problem.

[jeffandnicole]

Besides, the Garden State Parkway was impassible due to floodwaters.  Where's Route 55 always been proposed to go?  To the Garden State Parkway.

Where did the waters of Sandy make the Parkway impassible?  North or south of where 55 was to connect to it?

Was the portion of the Parkway that was made impassable due to floodwaters of Sandy the stretch that's at grade with intersections rather than interchanges (which is currently being raised and rebuilt as an expressway - those who attended last month's Cape May meet know such first-hand)?

While the Parkway will be raised at the present, traffic lit intersections as interchanges will carry the Parkway over the intersecting streets, the roadway between those interchanges is staying at it's current level.

There are numerous areas all along the Parkway where the roadbed isn't much higher than the surrounding land, where many areas are wetlands.  In South Jersey, there isn't any one area that's particular flood-prone, but a localized, heavy rain could flood the Parkway and many other roadways at any one time.

As for hurricanes and other major storms, if you wait to evacuate until the hurricane hits, you're already too late.   In most cases, someone wouldn't be able to get to the Parkway because of flooding on the local roads.  It kinda makes the Parkway flooding issues a moot point, and it would be argued that the person should've evacuated when told to do so ahead of time.

[Pete from Boston]

What's mostly interesting is that you're sure to get people that'll say they don't want the route because it'll bring increased development...when there's been a whole lot of increased development already, which makes an alternate route or widening of existing routes all the more needed.

But it's a freeway. A freeway can't really have development because it's a controlled access roadway. It's not like the situation with US 1 in Mercer and Middlesex Counties, where development exploded because it was left as-is. South of Millville, it's pretty rural, but still, it's a route for the shore traffic and the shore traffic is a problem.

It sure can spur development, though.  A freeway makes the adjacent arterials much more attractive development sites.  Of course, this could all prevented with zoning, but those tax dollars tend to be too tempting in the end to zone much of it out.

[jeffandnicole]

What's mostly interesting is that you're sure to get people that'll say they don't want the route because it'll bring increased development...when there's been a whole lot of increased development already, which makes an alternate route or widening of existing routes all the more needed.

But it's a freeway. A freeway can't really have development because it's a controlled access roadway. It's not like the situation with US 1 in Mercer and Middlesex Counties, where development exploded because it was left as-is. South of Millville, it's pretty rural, but still, it's a route for the shore traffic and the shore traffic is a problem.

It sure can spur development, though.  A freeway makes the adjacent arterials much more attractive development sites.  Of course, this could all prevented with zoning, but those tax dollars tend to be too tempting in the end to zone much of it out.

The simplest way to exhibit this is by looking at historic aerial photos before a highway was built, and after.  In the years after the highway was built, developments start to go up near the interchanges.

The problem with shore traffic is that it's an issue for about 4 months or so out of the year, and even then generally limited to Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.  When the state looks at congested corridors, NJ 47 isn't even close to ranking in the top 10...except when they make adjustments to account for the shore traffic.  Then it easily becomes a highly ranked congested corridor.  So the state has to balance the needs of the shore and emergency routing with the fact that over 300 days out of the year traffic moves without delay.

There is an upcoming ITS project that will add cameras and variable message signs to Routes 47, 49, 50 & 347 ( http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/stip1423/sec3/routes/rt347.pdf ).  The project won't begin till 2016/17 at the earliest, and the reality of those projects is the signs are only as good as what's posted on them.  If they use the Time Travel System it'll at least tell you how long it takes to get somewhere, although congestion relief will be minimal if people don't find another route.

Other shore corridors have a lot more year-round traffic...and also benefit from widening projects back in the 60's when it was easier to build and widen roads.

[Zeffy]

The Route 3 bridge in Secaucus from NJ 495 (as well as the eastbound lane) is going to be closed tonight for repairs after a rather bad accident happened yesterday.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/about/press/2015/021115.shtm

But here's the kicker...

I-495 eastbound lane and ramp closure
tonight for emergency bridge repairs in Secaucus

I-495 is back? This is from NJDOT...so...

[jeffandnicole]

The Route 3 bridge in Secaucus from NJ 495 (as well as the eastbound lane) is going to be closed tonight for repairs after a rather bad accident happened yesterday.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/about/press/2015/021115.shtm

But here's the kicker...

I-495 eastbound lane and ramp closure
tonight for emergency bridge repairs in Secaucus

I-495 is back? This is from NJDOT...so...

Ironically, NJDOT is generally more likely to use Route XXX rather than I-XXX.

[Zeffy]

Ironically, NJDOT is generally more likely to use Route XXX rather than I-XXX.

Yup, so is NJ.com. They always use Route 78 when referring to an accident on I-78 it seems, but other areas (such as around Trenton) use the proper designation of I-95, I-295, etc.

[Mergingtraffic]

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2015/02/victim_in_fatal_tractor_trailer_crash_on_route_in.html#incart_m-rpt-1

[jeffandnicole]

Those of you that take 295 rather than the Turnpike may remember the iconic Navy ship-looking building slightly north of Rt. 38 (Exit 40). Over the past year or two they've built an addition onto the building, which (IMO) doesn't look nearly as impressive as the original building.

[roadman65]

Ironically, NJDOT is generally more likely to use Route XXX rather than I-XXX.

Yup, so is NJ.com. They always use Route 78 when referring to an accident on I-78 it seems, but other areas (such as around Trenton) use the proper designation of I-95, I-295, etc.

I have never heard of I-80 or I-287 used.  It was always Route 80 and Route 287.

In fact it was not until I moved to Florida when I learned the the General Public actually used "I" before interstate numbers on highways.  After living in NJ all my life I thought all states used routes to define any route number.  I was the only one calling I-4 by "Route 4" when I first started living in Orlando.

[slorydn1]

Everything here in eastern NC is "Highway XX", (Highway 70, Highway 17, Highway 55) with no characterization of whether its a US or NC route with the exceptions being the interstates-but we don't mention them much in local conversations, its 79 miles to the nearest interchange on I-95-a topic for a different thread.


This is a big difference from when I grew up in the NW 'burbs of Chicago, where everything was either "The Ike", "The Kennedy" or whatever surface street name a particular numbered route would be signed (Higgins Rd for IL-72, Golf Rd for IL-58). The only exception that I remember was "53" from Lake-Cook Road to the current I-355 interchange. It was Route (pronounced rout) 53, even though I-290 was concurrent all the way up to the then Northwest Tollway (now Jane Adams)


When I was little (until 9 years old) we lived in the Grand Rapids, MI area and it was just 96 or 196 for the interstates, 131 for US-131, and M-XX for the state routes-Chicago Drive was M-21 back in the day.

Most of my family is originally from (and most still live in) the NYC-NJ-Long Island area and everything is route (pronounced root) to them except the named freeways-they seem to do that the same way as Chicago ("The Van Wyck, "The Cross-Bronx" and not I-678 or I-95).

I'm with roadman65-I didn't hear the term "I-" preceding a road number spoken until the first time I visited Fla in the early 80's.

[02 Park Ave]

I believe that it is common that the article "the" precedes the "I".