New Jersey

[J3ebrules]

I was trying to figure out where to post this shot of the lovely button copy signs from Airport Circle - and then I realized that the newer-looking street tag was technically incorrect and had to have been wrong when it was posted. Bridge Boulevard was renamed to Admiral Wilson Boulevard as far back as the 20's although this site ( http://www.dvrbs.com/camden-streets/CamdenNJ-Streets-AdmWilsonBlvd.htm) explains how it didn't officially change til 1937. Still, the street name sign looks considerably newer than those button-copy signs behind it and has to be contemporary - right? Correct me if I'm way off base.

[famartin]

I was trying to figure out where to post this shot of the lovely button copy signs from Airport Circle - and then I realized that the newer-looking street tag was technically incorrect and had to have been wrong when it was posted. Bridge Boulevard was renamed to Admiral Wilson Boulevard as far back as the 20's although this site ( http://www.dvrbs.com/camden-streets/CamdenNJ-Streets-AdmWilsonBlvd.htm) explains how it didn't officially change til 1937. Still, the street name sign looks considerably newer than those button-copy signs behind it and has to be contemporary - right? Correct me if I'm way off base.

Much newer. I noticed that oddity a few weeks back too and was also scratching my head about it.

Edit: I just checked, and the SLD is correct, so not sure how that could've ended up saying that. https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/pdf/00000030__-.pdf

[_Simon]

I was trying to figure out where to post this shot of the lovely button copy signs from Airport Circle - and then I realized that the newer-looking street tag was technically incorrect and had to have been wrong when it was posted. Bridge Boulevard was renamed to Admiral Wilson Boulevard as far back as the 20's although this site ( http://www.dvrbs.com/camden-streets/CamdenNJ-Streets-AdmWilsonBlvd.htm) explains how it didn't officially change til 1937. Still, the street name sign looks considerably newer than those button-copy signs behind it and has to be contemporary - right? Correct me if I'm way off base.

Much newer. I noticed that oddity a few weeks back too and was also scratching my head about it.

Edit: I just checked, and the SLD is correct, so not sure how that could've ended up saying that. https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/pdf/00000030__-.pdf

They erected similarly wrong signs at US-202 and Chubb Way in branchburg a few years ago that said "west county blvd" even though that hadn't been the roads name in several decades.  I sent a few emails and it got corrected real fast but they left off the fact that it's CR-646.

SM-G965U

[_Simon]

I'm not really sure why NJDOT hasn't tried to remove either of those circles after all these years. Especially after undoing the Brielle Circle years ago. I'm hard pressed to think that a light and some jughandles wouldn't be better options at this point.

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

SM-G965U

[jeffandnicole]

Edit: I just checked, and the SLD is correct, so not sure how that could've ended up saying that. https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/pdf/00000030__-.pdf

The SLDs are basically a reference document put out there for the publix to use. NJDOT generally will use original documents and plans when developing their projects.

It also doesn't help that engineers are assigned projects randomly, and often may not have any knowledge of the area, and apparently don't even visit the site themselves.. To this point, I was trying to discuss the Creek Road exit off Rt. 42 at a public meeting with someone from NJDOT for the 295/76/42 project. He kept trying to correct me saying that the ramp leads to Leaf Ave, not Creek Road. I learned he had no idea the exit was signed Creek Rd.

[Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

None of this is true.  Even the airport circle isn't really a circle, but still referenced as such. Over half the traditional circles, closing in on 75% have been replaced, including heavily used ones near the shore

The Airport Circle here has been drastically modified in the past.  Nothing really represents a circle. Other than Kaighn Ave, each entry point is controlled by traffic lights. 38 West to 130 South goes thru a light, then is a triple left at another light.

The Collingswood Circle hasn't existed for 10 years and was converted to a regular intersection, yet the traffic camera name is still "Collingswood Circle"

[Alps]

[Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

None of this is true.  Even the airport circle isn't really a circle, but still referenced as such. Over half the traditional circles, closing in on 75% have been replaced, including heavily used ones near the shore

The Airport Circle here has been drastically modified in the past.  Nothing really represents a circle. Other than Kaighn Ave, each entry point is controlled by traffic lights. 38 West to 130 South goes thru a light, then is a triple left at another light.

The Collingswood Circle hasn't existed for 10 years and was converted to a regular intersection, yet the traffic camera name is still "Collingswood Circle"

So basically, NJDOT will attack circles as needed, but they have an ultimate goal of zero circles. They'll either replace it with a regular intersection, add traffic signals, or convert it to a roundabout.

[famartin]

[Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

None of this is true.  Even the airport circle isn't really a circle, but still referenced as such. Over half the traditional circles, closing in on 75% have been replaced, including heavily used ones near the shore

The Airport Circle here has been drastically modified in the past.  Nothing really represents a circle. Other than Kaighn Ave, each entry point is controlled by traffic lights. 38 West to 130 South goes thru a light, then is a triple left at another light.

The Collingswood Circle hasn't existed for 10 years and was converted to a regular intersection, yet the traffic camera name is still "Collingswood Circle"

So basically, NJDOT will attack circles as needed, but they have an ultimate goal of zero circles. They'll either replace it with a regular intersection, add traffic signals, or convert it to a roundabout.

One of the more interesting set ups is the Brunswick Circle area (Bus 1 and 206) which now has a roundabout just up the road (Bus 1 at Whitehead Road). Having driven both today, I realize that it's a bit confusing using circle rules and then roundabout rules in short succession. I wonder if that might lead to increased accidents at both.

[_Simon]

Edit: I just checked, and the SLD is correct, so not sure how that could've ended up saying that. https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/pdf/00000030__-.pdf

The SLDs are basically a reference document put out there for the publix to use. NJDOT generally will use original documents and plans when developing their projects.

It also doesn't help that engineers are assigned projects randomly, and often may not have any knowledge of the area, and apparently don't even visit the site themselves.. To this point, I was trying to discuss the Creek Road exit off Rt. 42 at a public meeting with someone from NJDOT for the 295/76/42 project. He kept trying to correct me saying that the ramp leads to Leaf Ave, not Creek Road. I learned he had no idea the exit was signed Creek Rd.

[Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

None of this is true.  Even the airport circle isn't really a circle, but still referenced as such. Over half the traditional circles, closing in on 75% have been replaced, including heavily used ones near the shore

The Airport Circle here has been drastically modified in the past.  Nothing really represents a circle. Other than Kaighn Ave, each entry point is controlled by traffic lights. 38 West to 130 South goes thru a light, then is a triple left at another light.

The Collingswood Circle hasn't existed for 10 years and was converted to a regular intersection, yet the traffic camera name is still "Collingswood Circle"

What do you mean "none of this is true"?  Circles are (one of) the only at-grade crossings with full movements (besides stop signs alone) that require no signals or electricity,  and the possible angle of impact in an accident is much shallower than any orthogonal crossing. And whether or not they are a part of NJ life is a subjective opinion, so I'm not sure what specifically I said about traffic circles that you disagree with. 

SM-G965U

[storm2k]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

[_Simon]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

SM-G965U

[Alps]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

SM-G965U

Because the state is doing what it can with the money it has, that's why.

[_Simon]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

SM-G965U

Because the state is doing what it can with the money it has, that's why.

Does the state earmark funds for specific projects or is their a prioritized list of projects that get funded from a general pool of dollars?  Just curious. 

SM-G965U

[storm2k]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

For Somerville, specifically, the state spent $26 million in the early 90s to build the 202 flyover, which did help some, but not enough. Also, given the geometry of 206's entry into the circle, you'd probably be looking at a sizable amount of property takings to work out a safe high volume interchange of these roadways without major compromises. Accidents are still pretty common in the death trap, and I expect that at some point, there will be enough political will to dedicate the money to fully eliminate that circle once and for all.

Flemington is in pretty much the same boat. That circle is also smack in the middle of a ton of commercial development and costs just for the land to make a proper interchange there are probably beyond prohibitive.

[_Simon]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

For Somerville, specifically, the state spent $26 million in the early 90s to build the 202 flyover, which did help some, but not enough. Also, given the geometry of 206's entry into the circle, you'd probably be looking at a sizable amount of property takings to work out a safe high volume interchange of these roadways without major compromises. Accidents are still pretty common in the death trap, and I expect that at some point, there will be enough political will to dedicate the money to fully eliminate that circle once and for all.

Flemington is in pretty much the same boat. That circle is also smack in the middle of a ton of commercial development and costs just for the land to make a proper interchange there are probably beyond prohibitive.

Help me understand how a signal requires more space than the existing circles footprints.

In Flemington there is adequate room to have the routes meet at a signal, complete with channelized right turns.  The only caveat is that traffic to/from 202 to the north needs to make a turn to stay on the route.

And there should be more than enough room under 202 in Somerville to just bring all the legs to a single signal under the flyover.  If you took the land from the Mavis you'd be able to T 206 up to 28 and then have 28 cross the ramps from 202 in a pair of coordinated signals.




SM-G965U

[jeffandnicole]

Does the state earmark funds for specific projects or is their a prioritized list of projects that get funded from a general pool of dollars?  Just curious. 
SM-G965U

https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/

https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp20/pdf/tcp20.pdf

https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp20/sec7/njdot5year.pdf

https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/stip2029/pdf/stip.pdf

[jeffandnicole]

Edit: I just checked, and the SLD is correct, so not sure how that could've ended up saying that. https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/pdf/00000030__-.pdf

The SLDs are basically a reference document put out there for the publix to use. NJDOT generally will use original documents and plans when developing their projects.

It also doesn't help that engineers are assigned projects randomly, and often may not have any knowledge of the area, and apparently don't even visit the site themselves.. To this point, I was trying to discuss the Creek Road exit off Rt. 42 at a public meeting with someone from NJDOT for the 295/76/42 project. He kept trying to correct me saying that the ramp leads to Leaf Ave, not Creek Road. I learned he had no idea the exit was signed Creek Rd.

[Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles. 

None of this is true.  Even the airport circle isn't really a circle, but still referenced as such. Over half the traditional circles, closing in on 75% have been replaced, including heavily used ones near the shore

The Airport Circle here has been drastically modified in the past.  Nothing really represents a circle. Other than Kaighn Ave, each entry point is controlled by traffic lights. 38 West to 130 South goes thru a light, then is a triple left at another light.

The Collingswood Circle hasn't existed for 10 years and was converted to a regular intersection, yet the traffic camera name is still "Collingswood Circle"

What do you mean "none of this is true"?  Circles are (one of) the only at-grade crossings with full movements (besides stop signs alone) that require no signals or electricity,  and the possible angle of impact in an accident is much shallower than any orthogonal crossing. And whether or not they are a part of NJ life is a subjective opinion, so I'm not sure what specifically I said about traffic circles that you disagree with. 

SM-G965U

Because as I said, more than half of the circles have been replaced already.

Most circles that have been replaced havent suffered any backlash, and when there's been gripes, its more about the future plans, not that the circle is being removed.

Electricity isn't much of a factor in deciding to upgrade an intersection. If it was, transportation departments would claim that one light per direction is good enough, and there would be no street lighting.

When they've been replaced, not only do they replace them with lights, some like the 73/70 circle was replaced with a costly grade separated interchange! Even the 202 circle you cited had one installed.

Every circle is different, so theres are many reasons why some are replaced, some are modified, and some are left alone.

[storm2k]

Because navigating circles are a historic part of NJ life (esp near the shore) and there's no reason to replace them and face public backlash unless people are dying left and right, which typically is not a thing that happens with circles.

By your reckoning, we should have stuck with two lane roads, or express roads that were undivided or just divided by a small median, because that's a historic part of life. Roadway engineering and the knowledge of the best ways to move large amounts of traffic through areas and intersections has changed a lot over the last number of decades. You make it sound like we should all put our heads in the sand and ignore everything, simply because it should be the way "we've always done it".

You don't see any new circles because they take up oodles of costly land, but once it's in place, a circle will always have drastically lower operating expenses, accidents, and injuries than any type of signalized intersection.  It's only downfall is capacity.

Right, which is why NJDOT has spent untold millions of dollars over the last 30 years to slowly eliminate a large number of circles. Modern roundabouts have been shown in studies to be as safe or safer than signalized intersections in some places depending on volume, which is why you see more of them. But you're confusing two different things here. The traditional "Jersey Circle" is an outmoded concept that causes more accidents, driver confusion, and often backups, which is why so many have been eliminated.

Well maybe with your state-specific insight on circle conversion, you could tell me why all the circles I navigate that are clearly at capacity, such as Somerville's, were not at the top of the list to be replaced, and why others like Flemington get reworked time and time again but never removed.

And yes I'm specifically talking about NJ traffic circles (compete with the CIRCLE warning sign), not roundabouts.  Roundabouts don't typically allow any movements to go through at full speed when the circle is empty, and the geometry usually explicitly prevents this, while Jersey circles are often elongated in one direction to minimize curves on the "through" movement (like 202/31 NB onto 202 NB).

For Somerville, specifically, the state spent $26 million in the early 90s to build the 202 flyover, which did help some, but not enough. Also, given the geometry of 206's entry into the circle, you'd probably be looking at a sizable amount of property takings to work out a safe high volume interchange of these roadways without major compromises. Accidents are still pretty common in the death trap, and I expect that at some point, there will be enough political will to dedicate the money to fully eliminate that circle once and for all.

Flemington is in pretty much the same boat. That circle is also smack in the middle of a ton of commercial development and costs just for the land to make a proper interchange there are probably beyond prohibitive.

Help me understand how a signal requires more space than the existing circles footprints.

In Flemington there is adequate room to have the routes meet at a signal, complete with channelized right turns.  The only caveat is that traffic to/from 202 to the north needs to make a turn to stay on the route.

And there should be more than enough room under 202 in Somerville to just bring all the legs to a single signal under the flyover.  If you took the land from the Mavis you'd be able to T 206 up to 28 and then have 28 cross the ramps from 202 in a pair of coordinated signals.

I doubt a signal, even with some double laned exclusive turn lanes and other enhancements, would sufficiently handle the traffic at Somervillle. If it were, I'm pretty sure NJDOT would have elected for that over a very expensive flyover when they tackled improving the circle in the 1990s. Clearly their engineering studies concluded that the flyover ramp offered the best improvement for traffic. The heaviest moves are still 202-206SB onto 206 and 206 NB continuing onto 202-206. You would need some sort of ramp system to let that traffic flow more easily between those points. Then you could just send 28 straight across under the flyover (which they probably should have just done in the first place, but I guess the engineers didn't think it was warranted). I just think that the flyover was seen as the best option that didn't involve major land takings, since I think they just ate into the parking lots of a few places (the old Denny's and motel on the south side of 202, and the entryways to Bridgewater Doors and E&B on the northbound side). These are the many things that need to be considered as part of a plan to improve an intersection.

[storm2k]

In other news, the 495 viaduct project is advancing to a new stage. New traffic pattern will be in place by this Saturday, 8/29. NJDOT has published a map of the new traffic pattern for this stage of construction.

[jeffandnicole]

In other news, the 495 viaduct project is advancing to a new stage. New traffic pattern will be in place by this Saturday, 8/29. NJDOT has published a map of the new traffic pattern for this stage of construction.

That is going to be one tight, accident-prone cattleshute. 

I would be avoiding it as much as possible if I had to go that way on a daily basis!!

[Crown Victoria]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

[Alps]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

Right now, our prices are midpack (they used to be on the low end). Now they'll be getting up there... still cheaper than PA and downstate NY though.

[Crown Victoria]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

Right now, our prices are midpack (they used to be on the low end). Now they'll be getting up there... still cheaper than PA and downstate NY though.

If I understand NJ's law regarding gas taxes correctly, since it has a target for total revenue generated, there's the possibility that next year, after the pandemic is over and the economy recovers, the gas tax could decrease. I could be wrong on that though...

[Rothman]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

Right now, our prices are midpack (they used to be on the low end). Now they'll be getting up there... still cheaper than PA and downstate NY though.

If I understand NJ's law regarding gas taxes correctly, since it has a target for total revenue generated, there's the possibility that next year, after the pandemic is over and the economy recovers, the gas tax could decrease. I could be wrong on that though...

Aw.  That's precious that you think taxes could decrease in NJ.

[Crown Victoria]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

Right now, our prices are midpack (they used to be on the low end). Now they'll be getting up there... still cheaper than PA and downstate NY though.

If I understand NJ's law regarding gas taxes correctly, since it has a target for total revenue generated, there's the possibility that next year, after the pandemic is over and the economy recovers, the gas tax could decrease. I could be wrong on that though...

Aw.  That's precious that you think taxes could decrease in NJ.

Remember, I said they COULD. I would be just as shocked as everyone else if they did. Most likely a way will be found to keep raising them more.

[jeffandnicole]

New Jersey's gas tax is getting even closer to PA's...moving up to 4th highest!

https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/08/nj-gas-tax-to-rise-93-cents-a-gallon-on-oct-1.html

Right now, our prices are midpack (they used to be on the low end). Now they'll be getting up there... still cheaper than PA and downstate NY though.

If I understand NJ's law regarding gas taxes correctly, since it has a target for total revenue generated, there's the possibility that next year, after the pandemic is over and the economy recovers, the gas tax could decrease. I could be wrong on that though...

Aw.  That's precious that you think taxes could decrease in NJ.

Hey, our Sales Tax went down!