http://www.courierpostonline.com/viewart/20130204/NEWS01/302040037
QuoteThey might have been a good idea in the 1950s and 60s, but a New Jersey lawmaker says any new ones should be banned.
QuoteOcean County Republican James Holzapfel (HOHL'-zap-fel) has been trying since 2003 to get a ban considered by the Legislature. He says the "Jersey left" can cause rush-hour nightmares. He also says it takes up too much land.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8666
Same story, but a different angle. The link to General Highway Talk is about legislating things that should be left to engineers. We can have a separate discussion in the Northeast forum about how this would affect New Jersey, jughandles in general, etc.
I think that having NJ engineering matching more closely to other states highways would be a good thing. But the jughandles already there wont be going away anytime soon, if ever
Quote from: jwolfer on February 04, 2013, 08:24:10 PM
I think that having NJ engineering matching more closely to other states highways would be a good thing. But the jughandles already there wont be going away anytime soon, if ever
Yeah, let's homogenize roads all around the country. It would make it sooooooo much more interesting to be a road enthusiast.
That is absurd, trying to ban all of them. There are places when they make sense.
It seems to me there may be a reasonable compromise. The article linked in the other thread talks about condemning property. I could see how it would be reasonable to mandate that they first explore non-jughandle options if construction of a jughandle would require the exercise of eminent domain and there's another design that would not, or that would require taking less property. But a flat-out ban seems like a poor idea, even if condemnation proceedings were needed, where it can be shown that alternative designs would be problematic.
And what's to say making a road wide enough for a left turn lane or 2 wouldn't require condemning land as well? And NJDOT only would condemn land if there is no other alternative. Example: when the circles on Rt. 70 were removed in Cherry Hill, a few jughangles were formed using existing roads, and another was built on open land behind businesses.
If this guy had his way, those businesses would have lost land/parking in front of the business, or would have had the lots condemned if there wasn't enough room.
I didn't say alternative designs wouldn't require it.
I actually don't mind the jughandles, as long as I know they're there. I kind of expect them on divided highways in New Jersey. (Their license plates could almost say "All turns from right lane.") Not having them further might bug me. What really bugs me is how Delaware has them here and there and they wind up being more disruptive than anything else.
Jughandles may or may not be beneficial. Obviously the jury is still out on it, considering how many threads on here have taken up the debate without actually showing any statistics to support one side or the other. But I think we can all agree that certain types of intersections shouldn't be flat-out banned by legislation; that kind of decision should be made by other people (FHWA?), and even what those people say shouldn't be considered might reasonably still have a good application in some location or another.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 05, 2013, 05:33:06 AM
And what's to say making a road wide enough for a left turn lane or 2 wouldn't require condemning land as well? And NJDOT only would condemn land if there is no other alternative. Example: when the circles on Rt. 70 were removed in Cherry Hill, a few jughangles were formed using existing roads, and another was built on open land behind businesses.
If this guy had his way, those businesses would have lost land/parking in front of the business, or would have had the lots condemned if there wasn't enough room.
This is one reason why jughandles came about. In many areas they actually required less land to build then left turn lanes. Another advantage is simplified light timing on the main roadway as there is only one phase to deal with (no protected left turn phases needed).
The best use of jughandles is when they are consistently applied over several miles, so that you know to keep right to make your turn in that stretch. Roads like US 130, NJ 18, and US 46 turn into a hodgepodge of jughandles and left turns so that only locals know the right way to turn. To me, jughandles can help traffic flow on an individual intersection basis, but you have to look at traffic on at least the subregional level.
Quote from: Steve on February 05, 2013, 07:04:42 PM
NJ 18
This one's not bad - it's all jughandles north of CR 516. It's only between US 9 and CR 516 that intersections can go either way.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on February 05, 2013, 03:59:54 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 05, 2013, 05:33:06 AM
And what's to say making a road wide enough for a left turn lane or 2 wouldn't require condemning land as well? And NJDOT only would condemn land if there is no other alternative. Example: when the circles on Rt. 70 were removed in Cherry Hill, a few jughangles were formed using existing roads, and another was built on open land behind businesses.
If this guy had his way, those businesses would have lost land/parking in front of the business, or would have had the lots condemned if there wasn't enough room.
This is one reason why jughandles came about. In many areas they actually required less land to build then left turn lanes. Another advantage is simplified light timing on the main roadway as there is only one phase to deal with (no protected left turn phases needed).
I dont see how jughandles would take less ROW than left turn lanes. It would be in different configuration but anytime a 2 lane road is widened in an urban or suburban area.
I am not impartial on jughandles I despise them and think they are stupid. However I can see the justification in certain areas . But I know from Ocean County NJ where I grew up many times jughandles were made using side streets or convoluted routes around businesses when left turn lanes would have made more sense and there was available ROW. For example Route 37 through Toms River east of the GSP has a pretty wide grassy median. And the jughandles at CR 549 go around buildings etc.
Quote from: jwolfer on February 06, 2013, 09:15:53 PM
For example Route 37 through Toms River east of the GSP has a pretty wide grassy median.
I can speak to this one in particular. You simply won't have enough throughput if you add another signal phase. 37 gets busy busy busy in the summer and needs as much mainline green time as possible.
Quote from: jwolfer on February 06, 2013, 09:15:53 PM
I dont see how jughandles would take less ROW than left turn lanes. It would be in different configuration but anytime a 2 lane road is widened in an urban or suburban area.
Consider modern-day road building. Nearly anytime there is pavement/concrete laid down (roads, parking lots, etc), a drainage pond needs to be built as well. These ponds are often located within the center of the jughandle, so the majority of that land would be used anyway.
NJ is also a special case - businesses/homes tend to be built close to the road; much closer than in other states. And lots tend to be smaller. Even taking the 6' - 12' per side necessary for the left turn lane can severely encroach on a property's yard or parking area.
You know Steve, made a point. Jughandles do cut down on the amount of phases that traffic signals can have.
However, he did make a point that jughandles should be used for long stretches and somewhat standardized. US 46 in Parsipany is a wonderful example as you have some intersections with and some without. Then you have Smith Road that has a left turn, but has to use Littleton and East Littleton Roads to make a U Turn from WB to EB after turning left on Smith. Then Vail Road is another story. I had ended up on US 46 EB from a RIRO and had most trouble trying to turn around to go WB.
The Holiday Inn signal on US 46 has no left turns and no jughandles. If you do not know the area and you want to enter the hotel from the WB side, good luck. Then now with the jughandles in addition to NJDOT closing the Smith Road ramp to I-287 SB, going from US 46 EB to I-287 SB is a series of turns. You have to cross US 202, then around a reverse jughandle via Parsipany Road. Cross US 46 to go to the ramp to I-287 and once on I-287 you cross over US 46.
US 130 is inconsistent as it has some jughandles and some direct turns and even median breaks that confuses non locals. On US 9 at least every divided part of it from US 1 to Lakewood is either interchanged or with jughandles. Here you can adjust so well if you are not familiar with the area. US 1 for the most part is steady except in Linden and Elizabeth as well as north of NJ 3. However, it is undivided from NJ 3 to US 46 so one can see that difference there.
I hate the ones where a random jughandle pops up on a road that normally has breaks and turns. Then you have the one in Malaga on US 40 where it meets NJ 47. Both are two lane roads that have no other jughandles around for miles and to make a simple left turn you have to go around a loop. If they built US 40 in a straight line as it should be there would no reason to have a jughandle in the first place, that is another story not in this topic. Anyway, jughandles do not belong on two lane roads especially at random points.
I thought PA did a good job utilizing them on the reconstructed US-22 in Western PA (From Murrysville to Ebensburg)... though there is a diverse mix of standard left-turn-lanes and jug handles along the corridor. Their big advantage here is making U-turns easier... a lot of redone stretches used to have no median - now the whole corridor does - and have a lot of existing business that now require U-turns to patronize. In fact, there are a handful of "modified jughandles" - or maybe "reverse jughandles" designed just for U-turns, where traffic turns left onto a little ramp-road (term?) to achive the U-turn without it being tight:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Delmont,+PA&hl=en&ll=40.405813,-79.604053&spn=0.002578,0.005681&sll=41.117935,-77.604698&sspn=5.221572,11.634521&t=k&hnear=Delmont,+Westmoreland,+Pennsylvania&z=18 (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Delmont,+PA&hl=en&ll=40.405813,-79.604053&spn=0.002578,0.005681&sll=41.117935,-77.604698&sspn=5.221572,11.634521&t=k&hnear=Delmont,+Westmoreland,+Pennsylvania&z=18)
Though more on-topic, this type of thing seems -at least to me- to be something that is NOT at all the role of any state legislature.
Jughandles do a job if they are consistent. Look at NJ 36. From its northern terminus at Keyport to the Shrewsbury River Bridge there are no left turns in the 12 plus miles at any of the intersections. Even at Miller Street in Highlands, that has no jughandles is not allowed left turns off of NJ 36. Locals there know to use Monmouth County 8 to access Miller or to u turn at the next place where a jughandle exists is not that much of a hardship.
The fact, it works well and keeps traffic moving freely and you can maintain a good speed without turning motorist interruptions like we have on highways in Orlando. If you have mix and match, some jughandles and some not, you will still get the weaving and slowdowns, especially when a motorists does not know if you need to be to the left or to the right.
Rt. 42 shows what can happen with inconsistency. Heading SB from the freeway portion to the local portion, the intersection that causes the most congestion is the first one that using left turn lanes rather than jughandles (Ganttown Rd) due to the extra phases.
I don't necessarily mind the inconsistancy...as I mentioned before, I just wished the intersections were signed better in advance to note if you need to keep left to make a left, or keep right to make a left.
One unusual case features US 130 South at an intersection (Market St) with both a left turn lane and a jughandle, although it's out of necessity. Here's the intersection: http://goo.gl/maps/PYihv . If you zoom out a bit, you'll see that the right two lanes are coming from I-76 East, and the left two lanes have been the US 130 SB lanes. Rather than having traffic from either side crossing over at least 2 lanes to make the left or take the jughandle, traffic can just stay left or right.
Of course, if traffic from US 130 South wants to make a right, they're forced to cross over 2 lanes in a short time period (ignore the fact there's a solid white line; everyone else does anyway).
It also helps that there's a large storage area between the north & southbound lanes when traffic turns left, reducing the need for an exclusive left turn lane.