New Jersey

[roadman65]

Springfield, NJ has one and so does Summit, NJ.  In fact at one time they were once connected.

[jeffandnicole]

Public Meeting regarding the 295/42 missing moves ramps on Thursday, June 11th.

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/meetings/documents/handout061115kn.pdf

This is a significant step in the overall transportation network in the general area.  These missing moves were originally scheduled to be built a decade ago, but have been pushed off for various reasons.  At the numerous 295/76/42 Direct Connection meetings, the missing move ramps have been asked about by many of the attendees, but since the project was always a separate project, those from NJDOT or the private consultant didn't have any info regarding the project (or if they had info, they couldn't say).

The project still won't begin until Fiscal Year 2017 at the earliest (which begins about July or October, 2016), and will take about 3 or 4 years to complete.

For those interested in attending, the meeting is tonight.

I re-read the attached handout and realized I missed something.  It mentions they'll reconstruct the Creek Rd overpass over 295 (which was hit by a truck many years ago and now has an unusual pier configuration to it) slightly north of the original location to accompany the missing moves' ramps underneath it.  This implies the entire ramp configuration has been moved closer to the main 295/42/76 interchange, as previous designs always had it further away from the main interchange, south of Creek Rd. 

There's also potentially some buildings and businesses in its path now too.

Looking forward to viewing the drawings tonight to see what they have planned for now.

[Alps]

Public Meeting regarding the 295/42 missing moves ramps on Thursday, June 11th.

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/meetings/documents/handout061115kn.pdf

This is a significant step in the overall transportation network in the general area.  These missing moves were originally scheduled to be built a decade ago, but have been pushed off for various reasons.  At the numerous 295/76/42 Direct Connection meetings, the missing move ramps have been asked about by many of the attendees, but since the project was always a separate project, those from NJDOT or the private consultant didn't have any info regarding the project (or if they had info, they couldn't say).

The project still won't begin until Fiscal Year 2017 at the earliest (which begins about July or October, 2016), and will take about 3 or 4 years to complete.

For those interested in attending, the meeting is tonight.

I re-read the attached handout and realized I missed something.  It mentions they'll reconstruct the Creek Rd overpass over 295 (which was hit by a truck many years ago and now has an unusual pier configuration to it) slightly north of the original location to accompany the missing moves' ramps underneath it.  This implies the entire ramp configuration has been moved closer to the main 295/42/76 interchange, as previous designs always had it further away from the main interchange, south of Creek Rd. 

There's also potentially some buildings and businesses in its path now too.

Looking forward to viewing the drawings tonight to see what they have planned for now.

The complication with putting Missing Moves west of Creek Road was either dealing with substandard accel/decel lanes, nonexistent shoulder for a distance, or reconstructing a pair of creek bridges. So that must have been the impetus to shift them east. We did look at it and there's some weird ... thing... north of 295/east of Creek that we decided really couldn't be touched. It's doable to shoehorn a NB-WB ramp in there without touching it, but you need some property acquisition. We didn't want to deal with it (I'm talking a decade ago at the conceptual level, mind you), but I guess someone figured out what it is and that it's touchable.

[jeffandnicole]

Here are some of the designs from the meeting last night.  As mentioned above, the ramps are now a bit closer to the main interchange on 295 than what I had seen originally, so now they are on the north side of Creek Rd.  As Steve alluded to, it does take away the need to build additional ramps over the creek in that particular area, although 295 will still need to be widened a bit to accommodate the additional lane.  The Creek Rd bridge will be reconstructed next to the existing overpass, and will probably be raised a bit to accommodate the ramps.  The overpass clearance is a bit low for today's design standards anyway.

The ramps to/from Rt. 42 though area basically in the same area as they were originally proposed.  Same with the Rt. 42 Northbound on/off for Creek Rd.  A big change though for the Rt. 42 Southbound on/off, as those ramps now lead into a roundabout on relocated Leaf Ave, which had never been proposed in the past.  Those ramps have always been a bit problematic due to their location in the network there between the 295 and 55 interchanges.  The biggest issue will be the truck traffic that will have to go thru that roundabout, which is fairly considerable.

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

[froggie]

Curious how there's a roundabout for the southbound ramps, but not the northbound ramps.  Why the difference?

[BrianP]

Curious how there's a roundabout for the southbound ramps, but not the northbound ramps.  Why the difference?

Space.  To do a roundabout would likely require acquiring some more land on the east side of Beningo Ave. 

I guess it's just cheaper to replace the Creek Road bridge next to current one than do what they did with the Bell Rd overpass doing it in halves in the same location.

It's funny how there's a blob of Deptford, Gloucester County on the other side of the creek there. From historical aerials that was the former route of the creek that has shifted or short-circuited.

Brian

[jeffandnicole]

The roundabout on the SB side was a relatively recent addition. On the NB side, you basically have a routine T intersection. But by adding a roundabout there, they would need to acquire additional land, which really isn't necessary (as Brian said).

For the SB side, the proposed missing move ramps go thru existing Leaf Ave, so they were in more if a position to do something there, and land was being taken anyway. I don't know if a roundabout was really even necessary there either, based on how the ramp needs to tie into the local roads to get traffic to/from Creek Rd. The nearby capped landfill is supposed to be developed at some point, so they could've thrown that into consideration as well.

[jeffandnicole]

Curious how there's a roundabout for the southbound ramps, but not the northbound ramps.  Why the difference?

Space.  To do a roundabout would likely require acquiring some more land on the east side of Beningo Ave. 

I guess it's just cheaper to replace the Creek Road bridge next to current one than do what they did with the Bell Rd overpass doing it in halves in the same location.

It's funny how there's a blob of Deptford, Gloucester County on the other side of the creek there. From historical aerials that was the former route of the creek that has shifted or short-circuited.

Brian

And the land is available, unlike at Bell Rd. I'm not really a fan of those shifts though.

I did forget to mention, due to that new ramp alignment by 295 there is one building that needs to be taken between Creek Rd and 295, and an empty lot that appears to be used for truck parking.

[Alps]

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

In your drawings, if you look by the leader line for the triangle 4, it's just to the right, or just NNE of the orange splotch. You can drive by and look for yourself sometime.

I find it interesting that they've decided to just scrap half the properties between Creek and Leaf. There was a lot of effort much earlier in the process to stay south of Leaf with the Missing Moves and then come up, neatly dividing the landfill area from the light industry/mixed uses above it. Honestly, at this point, they may as well blow out everything west of Exit 14.

[Roadrunner75]

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

In your drawings, if you look by the leader line for the triangle 4, it's just to the right, or just NNE of the orange splotch. You can drive by and look for yourself sometime.

I assume this is on the WIP radio antennas site?

[Alps]

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

In your drawings, if you look by the leader line for the triangle 4, it's just to the right, or just NNE of the orange splotch. You can drive by and look for yourself sometime.

I assume this is on the WIP radio antennas site?

It was definitely not the radio antenna. IIRC there's a square patch of land with a box or a tower or something that's owned or leased by some secret (govt or non-govt, don't know) agency.

[SteveG1988]

Belmar closed to visitors, reached capacity.

http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/06/belmar_is_at_max_capacity_mayor_says_closes_traffi.html

[jeffandnicole]

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

In your drawings, if you look by the leader line for the triangle 4, it's just to the right, or just NNE of the orange splotch. You can drive by and look for yourself sometime.

I assume this is on the WIP radio antennas site?

It was definitely not the radio antenna. IIRC there's a square patch of land with a box or a tower or something that's owned or leased by some secret (govt or non-govt, don't know) agency.

From the road, one can barely see a few satellite dishes in that general area.  The entryway is gated closed, and the brush from both Creek Rd and 295 is too thick to see thru while driving by. 

On the other side of 295, from what the officials at the meeting said, they wanted to leave as much of the former landfill untouched so that it can be developed in the future.  There's also some sort of landscaping(?) business where Creek Rd turns 90 degrees near 295, and I guess this allows them to remain in business as well.  Not sure why this changed, but considering 10 years has passed during the current phase of the project that discussions were had with some of the property owners and they modified the design based on those discussions.

My one issue with NJDOT at these meetings are they are generally unwilling to give too much info about the project, if they know anything at all.  And they assume - somewhat correctly - that everyone going in there doesn't understand what's going on.  Someone like me - or most anyone on these forums - are a little more intelligent in terms of understanding these concept designs.

When I first started talking to two people, I started mentioned some of the differences compared to what I saw designed earlier.  I could quickly pick out the one guy that was fairly new on the project and tried to disagree with some of what I was saying.  Luckily, the 2nd guy was more familiar with the history, and interrupted to say that yeah, I was referring to a previous version and some of the changes that the design has undergone.  The 1st guy also then tried to tell me what road did what...which I tried to cut him off a little.  After the meeting sometimes I think back and realize that maybe they would've said something I wasn't familiar with and should just let them talk, but I have to listen thru all of the obviously stuff they're saying and I would just lose my train of thought anyway.

It's also clear that this project is just another item of work to them.  Rarely do they live in the area, so I can't even talk about other projects in the area.  They're not familiar with them either on a work level or personal level.

Even after I get thru to them that I'm a bit more familiar than the average person on these projects, it's a bit tough to communicate with them.  They're only going to provide a certain amount of info. Sometimes I'm pretty aware they probably know a bit more, but won't or not permitted to say more, or truly they don't know about what I'm referring to.

[ixnay]

Belmar closed to visitors, reached capacity.

http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/06/belmar_is_at_max_capacity_mayor_says_closes_traffi.html

(No) thanks to a seafood festival.

Belmar's mayor tweeted Sunday night that its entrances were back open.  Can't believe you missed that tweet, Steve.

ixnay

[Roadrunner75]

(Steve: I wonder what that weird thing was, although knowing how old the area is, and how much remediation work they had to do just on the landfill alone, I could imagine how interesting it must have been.)

In your drawings, if you look by the leader line for the triangle 4, it's just to the right, or just NNE of the orange splotch. You can drive by and look for yourself sometime.

I assume this is on the WIP radio antennas site?

It was definitely not the radio antenna. IIRC there's a square patch of land with a box or a tower or something that's owned or leased by some secret (govt or non-govt, don't know) agency.

From the road, one can barely see a few satellite dishes in that general area.  The entryway is gated closed, and the brush from both Creek Rd and 295 is too thick to see thru while driving by. 

If it's here, it looks like the support building and equipment/backup generator fuel tank for the antenna site, surrounded at the moment by temporary staging for the 295/42 project.
https://www.google.com/maps/mms?ll=39.86451,-75.11024&spn=0.000492,0.000817&t=h&z=21
It does look like from GSV that there is a much smaller antenna next to the building near the dishes.

[storm2k]

Took a ride on 78 this morning, and I noticed that past Exit 41 going EB, the mile marker signs have been replaced with the newer enhanced (D10-4 and D10-5) mile marker signs. Two interesting notes. First, they're only placed every two tenths of a mile, instead of every tenth. Secodnly, they're posted in both directions on the sign post, so you can see them from both sides of the road. WB roadway still has the older NJDOT spec mile marker signs, although I'm sure they'll be replaced at some point.

[odditude]

The replacement BGS assembly for Exit 2 (CR 579) on I-95 (M) NB is staged on the side of the highway for installation (the original was removed in November in preparation for some roadwork).

The pull-through is now NORTH I-95 TO SOUTH I-295 with Lawrence as the control city. Bit of an odd choice, and inconsistent with the destinations for the NB onramps in Bucks County (which are generally Princeton).  The shields appear to be 30" with 18" letters, using D for 95 and B for 295 (yuck) - I personally prefer C for 3DIs (unless there are enough '1's to fit D at the 18" height).

I haven't yet gotten a good look at the advance sign for Exits 3 A-B (Scotch Rd) or the actual sign for Exit 2 itself. The old Exit 3 sign was fine, but the old Exit 2 sign was fugly compared to the advance signage.

[PHLBOS]

The pull-through is now NORTH I-95 TO SOUTH I-295 with Lawrence as the control city. Bit of an odd choice, and inconsistent with the destinations for the NB onramps in Bucks County (which are generally Princeton).

It's worth noting that the Princeton listings on the I-95 BGS' in Bucks County only started appearing within the past decade.  Previous BGS' used to list Trenton as a northbound I-95 destination all the way up until the Scudder Falls Bridge.  BTW, the previous-generation pull-through BGS at that location used to read (stacked vertically), "NORTH 95 New York"

The shields appear to be 30" with 18" letters, using D for 95 and B for 295 (yuck) - I personally prefer C for 3DIs (unless there are enough '1's to fit D at the 18" height).

I agree with you 100% with the above.  Unlike other states, Series B on 3di-shields in NJ were (thankfully) rare, only in isolated locations and on stand-alone trailblazers/reassurance markers.

[Zeffy]

Damn, I was just in that area yesterday for a job interview (I used Exit 3A instead of getting down to 2). The last replacement I saw on this stretch of (future I-295) I-95 north of Trenton was the CR 583 / Princeton Pike signs. Those are pretty ugly, with nasty looking county route shields and I think B numerals. B numerals are so gross to look at.

[odditude]

The pull-through is now NORTH I-95 TO SOUTH I-295 with Lawrence as the control city. Bit of an odd choice, and inconsistent with the destinations for the NB onramps in Bucks County (which are generally Princeton).

It's worth noting that the Princeton listings on the I-95 BGS' in Bucks County only started appearing within the past decade.  Previous BGS' used to list Trenton as a northbound I-95 destination all the way up until the Scudder Falls Bridge.  BTW, the previous-generation pull-through BGS at that location used to read (stacked vertically), "NORTH 95 New York"

The shields appear to be 30" with 18" letters, using D for 95 and B for 295 (yuck) - I personally prefer C for 3DIs (unless there are enough '1's to fit D at the 18" height).

I agree with you 100% with the above.  Unlike other states, Series B on 3di-shields in NJ were (thankfully) rare, only in isolated locations and on stand-alone trailblazers/reassurance markers.

i was mistaken; the numerals on the 295 shield are C, but they look horizontally compressed.

[Henry]

Damn, I was just in that area yesterday for a job interview (I used Exit 3A instead of getting down to 2). The last replacement I saw on this stretch of (future I-295) I-95 north of Trenton was the CR 583 / Princeton Pike signs. Those are pretty ugly, with nasty looking county route shields and I think B numerals. B numerals are so gross to look at.

Worse than even Clearview?

[noelbotevera]

The pull-through is now NORTH I-95 TO SOUTH I-295 with Lawrence as the control city. Bit of an odd choice, and inconsistent with the destinations for the NB onramps in Bucks County (which are generally Princeton).

It's worth noting that the Princeton listings on the I-95 BGS' in Bucks County only started appearing within the past decade.  Previous BGS' used to list Trenton as a northbound I-95 destination all the way up until the Scudder Falls Bridge.  BTW, the previous-generation pull-through BGS at that location used to read (stacked vertically), "NORTH 95 New York"

The shields appear to be 30" with 18" letters, using D for 95 and B for 295 (yuck) - I personally prefer C for 3DIs (unless there are enough '1's to fit D at the 18" height).

I agree with you 100% with the above.  Unlike other states, Series B on 3di-shields in NJ were (thankfully) rare, only in isolated locations and on stand-alone trailblazers/reassurance markers.

i was mistaken; the numerals on the 295 shield are C, but they look horizontally compressed.

I did in fact see I-295 shields down there on my way to AC almost a week ago - I'd say the shields at NJ 42 and I-295 were in fact, Series C but Series D shields still dominate the area.

[Zeffy]

Worse than even Clearview?

Oh hell no. Clearview numerals are much worse than Series B numerals.

[PHLBOS]

The pull-through is now NORTH I-95 TO SOUTH I-295 with Lawrence as the control city. Bit of an odd choice, and inconsistent with the destinations for the NB onramps in Bucks County (which are generally Princeton).

It's worth noting that the Princeton listings on the I-95 BGS' in Bucks County only started appearing within the past decade.  Previous BGS' used to list Trenton as a northbound I-95 destination all the way up until the Scudder Falls Bridge.  BTW, the previous-generation pull-through BGS at that location used to read (stacked vertically), "NORTH 95 New York"

The shields appear to be 30" with 18" letters, using D for 95 and B for 295 (yuck) - I personally prefer C for 3DIs (unless there are enough '1's to fit D at the 18" height).

I agree with you 100% with the above.  Unlike other states, Series B on 3di-shields in NJ were (thankfully) rare, only in isolated locations and on stand-alone trailblazers/reassurance markers.

i was mistaken; the numerals on the 295 shield are C, but they look horizontally compressed.

I did in fact see I-295 shields down there on my way to AC almost a week ago - I'd say the shields at NJ 42 and I-295 were in fact, Series C but Series D shields still dominate the area.

Let's be clear here, the BGS in question is located in Mercer County by the Delaware River; some 50 miles away from I-76/NJ 42 in Camden County.

Most of the I-295 shields on BGS' (at least the ones from I-76/NJ 42 to US 130/206) have recently been replaced or restickered with ones with smaller Series C numerals and with the red shield crests not quite in-line with the edges of the actual 3-di shield.

[Zeffy]

I did in fact see I-295 shields down there on my way to AC almost a week ago - I'd say the shields at NJ 42 and I-295 were in fact, Series C but Series D shields still dominate the area.

Have they changed from when I took these almost exactly a year ago going to Camden?



And PHLBOS is right - the sign odditude is referring to is nowhere near this interchange. It's on the (future I-295) segment of I-95 about 3 miles north of Trenton, one exit after crossing into New Jersey over the Delaware River.