New Jersey Turnpike

[Alps]

Work to widen parts of the Turnpike, Parkway take first step forward

Talks about two contract awards for environmental studies, permitting, and preliminary design work on the Turnpike:

1. Environmental studies and permitting contract to AECOM for the 1-4 additional lanes.
2. Preliminary design and environmental studies to Gannett Fleming for widening and rehab of the NBHCE.

Didn't realize they planned to widen the 78 segment. Other than the short stretch north of 16W, it seems like these two projects would eliminate the remaining 4-lane sections of the Turnpike.

Yes. It's in the 2020 Capital Plan, and includes a replacement for the Newark Bay Bridge. They want to make one with four lanes in each direction, which is smart.

I don't think they're replacing east of 14C, so that would remain two lanes each way. The other wild card is what happens with the PA bridge.

[storm2k]

Work to widen parts of the Turnpike, Parkway take first step forward

Talks about two contract awards for environmental studies, permitting, and preliminary design work on the Turnpike:

1. Environmental studies and permitting contract to AECOM for the 1-4 additional lanes.
2. Preliminary design and environmental studies to Gannett Fleming for widening and rehab of the NBHCE.

Didn't realize they planned to widen the 78 segment. Other than the short stretch north of 16W, it seems like these two projects would eliminate the remaining 4-lane sections of the Turnpike.

Yes. It's in the 2020 Capital Plan, and includes a replacement for the Newark Bay Bridge. They want to make one with four lanes in each direction, which is smart.

I don't think they're replacing east of 14C, so that would remain two lanes each way. The other wild card is what happens with the PA bridge.

Yeah, pretty sure that the logistics of replacing that entire viaduct would be cost prohibitive even for the Turnpike Authority. Plus, it has to narrow to two lanes past the curve into the Holland Tunnel approach, as there is a rather large building that's pretty much butting up against the ROW at that spot.

As for P0.0, it's also in the long term capital plan, but given that I don't think they're going to move on it without the PTC getting on board for their share, unless something cracks on the bridge again and makes it too unsafe to remain in use, I don't think there's going to be any sort of quick movement on it. NJTA must figure moving the NBHCE makes more sense to tackle first since that's entirely in their jurisdiction.

[jeffandnicole]

Work to widen parts of the Turnpike, Parkway take first step forward

Talks about two contract awards for environmental studies, permitting, and preliminary design work on the Turnpike:

1. Environmental studies and permitting contract to AECOM for the 1-4 additional lanes.
2. Preliminary design and environmental studies to Gannett Fleming for widening and rehab of the NBHCE.

Didn't realize they planned to widen the 78 segment. Other than the short stretch north of 16W, it seems like these two projects would eliminate the remaining 4-lane sections of the Turnpike.

Yes. It's in the 2020 Capital Plan, and includes a replacement for the Newark Bay Bridge. They want to make one with four lanes in each direction, which is smart.

I don't think they're replacing east of 14C, so that would remain two lanes each way. The other wild card is what happens with the PA bridge.

Yeah, pretty sure that the logistics of replacing that entire viaduct would be cost prohibitive even for the Turnpike Authority. Plus, it has to narrow to two lanes past the curve into the Holland Tunnel approach, as there is a rather large building that's pretty much butting up against the ROW at that spot.

As for P0.0, it's also in the long term capital plan, but given that I don't think they're going to move on it without the PTC getting on board for their share, unless something cracks on the bridge again and makes it too unsafe to remain in use, I don't think there's going to be any sort of quick movement on it. NJTA must figure moving the NBHCE makes more sense to tackle first since that's entirely in their jurisdiction.

The PTC is already on board with rehabbing/replacing the connector bridge.

https://www.patpconstruction.com/paturnpikei95/delaware-river-bridge.aspx

The last 2 paragraphs in that link are current, and references the fracture and the re-evaluation of the project.
I would suspect they are looking at a full replacement for both directions now, rather than an EB addition and WB rehab of the current span

[PHLBOS]

Cross-posted from the I-95/PA Turnpike Interchange thread:

I don't believe that anybody has yet commented on such; but on a recent weekend trip, I noticed that the NJTA finally got around to placing I-95 shields on its southbound overhead pull-through signs at Exit 8A.  Such must've happened within this year because such were not done when I last drove there just after last Christmas.  I believe such completes the through-sign updates in relation to the connection opening over 2 years ago.

[Alps]

Work to widen parts of the Turnpike, Parkway take first step forward

Talks about two contract awards for environmental studies, permitting, and preliminary design work on the Turnpike:

1. Environmental studies and permitting contract to AECOM for the 1-4 additional lanes.
2. Preliminary design and environmental studies to Gannett Fleming for widening and rehab of the NBHCE.

Didn't realize they planned to widen the 78 segment. Other than the short stretch north of 16W, it seems like these two projects would eliminate the remaining 4-lane sections of the Turnpike.

Yes. It's in the 2020 Capital Plan, and includes a replacement for the Newark Bay Bridge. They want to make one with four lanes in each direction, which is smart.

I don't think they're replacing east of 14C, so that would remain two lanes each way. The other wild card is what happens with the PA bridge.

Yeah, pretty sure that the logistics of replacing that entire viaduct would be cost prohibitive even for the Turnpike Authority. Plus, it has to narrow to two lanes past the curve into the Holland Tunnel approach, as there is a rather large building that's pretty much butting up against the ROW at that spot.

I mean, at some point they'll have to replace them, or do a Pulaski and replace each element in place. I don't know what the remaining lifespan might be on those structures.

[bluecountry]

Traffic sign engineer breaking in for a moment: If you have multiple options leading to a single destination city, it is appropriate to differentiate between them. For example, you will commonly see "Bridgeport next 7 exits" and then the next 7 exits are just street names. Or maybe 1-2 of them are route names with other destinations. The intrigue comes when not every exit leads to the city in question. You can take 14, 16E, or 18W/18E to the city. 15E, 15W, and 16W are not preferred and you wouldn't really list NYC as destinations for those. 15X won't get you there at all. This does pop up from time to time, and since it's a unique edge case, it is not fully covered by the MUTCD, and this is when to use engineering judgment. Fun fact about engineering judgment, no two engineers will see it the same way - I'll ask 1-2 others who I trust and go for a general consensus on what the "likely best way" is.

In this case, in a vacuum, I would probably have a sign south of 14:
NEW YORK CITY
Holland Tun.......Exit 14C
Lincoln Tun.......Exit 16E
G W Br.....Exits 18W/18E

Exit 14 I would sign I-78 Newark / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Holland Tun Exit 14C".
Exit 16E I would sign NJ 495 Weehawken / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Lincoln Tun Exit 16E".
Exit 16W I would sign NJ 3 Clifton / Secaucus, with supplemental sign "Lincoln Tun Exit 16W".
Exits 16E/18E I would sign I-95 TO I-80 Paterson / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "G W Br follow NORTH (95)"
Off each interchange, I would make sure to point people down the correct ramp to head east, and that's that.
Your mileage may vary.

Can you please weigh in on the NJTP SB and the idiotic use of Trenton not Philadelphia?

[bluecountry]

I'm not sure why Newburgh would need to be signed at all.  Those coming from NJ on I-287 get auxillary signs that say "To New England, Use I-87 North to I-84 East".  Outside of that, I can't imagine too many people who would need a sign to get them to Newburgh.  Most know that Albany is to the north.  But Newburgh?

Newburgh is not, IMHO, well enough known. Thruway control cities should be the major ones along the road: NYC, Albany, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo. From what I can see, the Thruway uses Erie west of Buffalo, passing on using Dunkirk, which along with adjacent Fredonia, is of comparable size to Newburgh.

EDIT: Maybe this needs to move to the Thruway topic, not here under NJ Turnpike

Newburgh does have one thing going for it that Dunkirk doesn't, at least as far as potential control city status goes - I-84 (and I-84 uses it as a control city).

Exactly.  I do not get why they use Newburgh for one road and not the other.
If using Newburgh on 84, use it on 87, OR on 84, just use Scranton.

[Alps]

Traffic sign engineer breaking in for a moment: If you have multiple options leading to a single destination city, it is appropriate to differentiate between them. For example, you will commonly see "Bridgeport next 7 exits" and then the next 7 exits are just street names. Or maybe 1-2 of them are route names with other destinations. The intrigue comes when not every exit leads to the city in question. You can take 14, 16E, or 18W/18E to the city. 15E, 15W, and 16W are not preferred and you wouldn't really list NYC as destinations for those. 15X won't get you there at all. This does pop up from time to time, and since it's a unique edge case, it is not fully covered by the MUTCD, and this is when to use engineering judgment. Fun fact about engineering judgment, no two engineers will see it the same way - I'll ask 1-2 others who I trust and go for a general consensus on what the "likely best way" is.

In this case, in a vacuum, I would probably have a sign south of 14:
NEW YORK CITY
Holland Tun.......Exit 14C
Lincoln Tun.......Exit 16E
G W Br.....Exits 18W/18E

Exit 14 I would sign I-78 Newark / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Holland Tun Exit 14C".
Exit 16E I would sign NJ 495 Weehawken / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Lincoln Tun Exit 16E".
Exit 16W I would sign NJ 3 Clifton / Secaucus, with supplemental sign "Lincoln Tun Exit 16W".
Exits 16E/18E I would sign I-95 TO I-80 Paterson / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "G W Br follow NORTH (95)"
Off each interchange, I would make sure to point people down the correct ramp to head east, and that's that.
Your mileage may vary.

Can you please weigh in on the NJTP SB and the idiotic use of Trenton not Philadelphia?

I can't. The Turnpike Authority is responsible for destinations on their facility. The FHWA is responsible for approved destinations along Interstate highways. Where or if the two of them disagree... that's between them.

[bluecountry]

Traffic sign engineer breaking in for a moment: If you have multiple options leading to a single destination city, it is appropriate to differentiate between them. For example, you will commonly see "Bridgeport next 7 exits" and then the next 7 exits are just street names. Or maybe 1-2 of them are route names with other destinations. The intrigue comes when not every exit leads to the city in question. You can take 14, 16E, or 18W/18E to the city. 15E, 15W, and 16W are not preferred and you wouldn't really list NYC as destinations for those. 15X won't get you there at all. This does pop up from time to time, and since it's a unique edge case, it is not fully covered by the MUTCD, and this is when to use engineering judgment. Fun fact about engineering judgment, no two engineers will see it the same way - I'll ask 1-2 others who I trust and go for a general consensus on what the "likely best way" is.

In this case, in a vacuum, I would probably have a sign south of 14:
NEW YORK CITY
Holland Tun.......Exit 14C
Lincoln Tun.......Exit 16E
G W Br.....Exits 18W/18E

Exit 14 I would sign I-78 Newark / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Holland Tun Exit 14C".
Exit 16E I would sign NJ 495 Weehawken / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Lincoln Tun Exit 16E".
Exit 16W I would sign NJ 3 Clifton / Secaucus, with supplemental sign "Lincoln Tun Exit 16W".
Exits 16E/18E I would sign I-95 TO I-80 Paterson / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "G W Br follow NORTH (95)"
Off each interchange, I would make sure to point people down the correct ramp to head east, and that's that.
Your mileage may vary.

Can you please weigh in on the NJTP SB and the idiotic use of Trenton not Philadelphia?

I can't. The Turnpike Authority is responsible for destinations on their facility. The FHWA is responsible for approved destinations along Interstate highways. Where or if the two of them disagree... that's between them.

Do you agree Philadelphia should be the control city on the NJTP south?

[02 Park Ave]

Traffic sign engineer breaking in for a moment: If you have multiple options leading to a single destination city, it is appropriate to differentiate between them. For example, you will commonly see "Bridgeport next 7 exits" and then the next 7 exits are just street names. Or maybe 1-2 of them are route names with other destinations. The intrigue comes when not every exit leads to the city in question. You can take 14, 16E, or 18W/18E to the city. 15E, 15W, and 16W are not preferred and you wouldn't really list NYC as destinations for those. 15X won't get you there at all. This does pop up from time to time, and since it's a unique edge case, it is not fully covered by the MUTCD, and this is when to use engineering judgment. Fun fact about engineering judgment, no two engineers will see it the same way - I'll ask 1-2 others who I trust and go for a general consensus on what the "likely best way" is.

In this case, in a vacuum, I would probably have a sign south of 14:
NEW YORK CITY
Holland Tun.......Exit 14C
Lincoln Tun.......Exit 16E
G W Br.....Exits 18W/18E

Exit 14 I would sign I-78 Newark / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Holland Tun Exit 14C".
Exit 16E I would sign NJ 495 Weehawken / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Lincoln Tun Exit 16E".
Exit 16W I would sign NJ 3 Clifton / Secaucus, with supplemental sign "Lincoln Tun Exit 16W".
Exits 16E/18E I would sign I-95 TO I-80 Paterson / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "G W Br follow NORTH (95)"
Off each interchange, I would make sure to point people down the correct ramp to head east, and that's that.
Your mileage may vary.

Can you please weigh in on the NJTP SB and the idiotic use of Trenton not Philadelphia?

I can't. The Turnpike Authority is responsible for destinations on their facility. The FHWA is responsible for approved destinations along Interstate highways. Where or if the two of them disagree... that's between them.

Do you agree Philadelphia should be the control city on the NJTP south?

No.  It should be Baltimore.

[Alps]

The Turnpike is an odd beast because it splits from I-95. So which do you sign? I understand why the Turnpike is signed to Camden and then Wilmington. I'm fine with that approach. North of I-95... I know traffic uses 7A to Trenton but I'm not sure how much. Again, I don't really have an opinion here. In general, as long as you don't pull a Pennsylvania and sign every podunk city in your own state instead of the major ones in the neighboring states, you're fine in my book. (Which is why I love how I-80 is signed to DWG in New Jersey as a "fuck you".)

[SignBridge]

Good point Alps. But on I-80, what city in Pa. could you even use? There are hardly any major cities in Pa. along I-80, unless you'd simply use Stroudsburg right across the river.

[jeffandnicole]

Good point Alps. But on I-80, what city in Pa. could you even use? There are hardly any major cities in Pa. along I-80, unless you'd simply use Stroudsburg right across the river.

Mount Pocono

[famartin]

Good point Alps. But on I-80, what city in Pa. could you even use? There are hardly any major cities in Pa. along I-80, unless you'd simply use Stroudsburg right across the river.

The only "major" city even sort of close to I-80 in eastern PA is Scranton/Wilkes-Barre. That's probably the best option (especially since I-80/I-380 is the best route to/from Scranton and I-380 branches off directly to Scranton with exactly that purpose in mind). Beyond Scranton, Williamsport could be used thanks to I-180, and then there really is nothing until Youngstown.

As far as the turnpike... I'm pretty sure that if we built all these roads simultaneously today, with no state boundaries considered, 95/NJTP would be signed "Philadelphia" southbound until 6, and "New York" northbound from that point. Because that's the two major cities they connect. But state boundaries and history make this much more murky than it should be.

[Rothman]

Hazleton...

[roadman65]

Exit 8A in Jamesburg uses Trenton when locals there would more likely use CR 535.  At that point it should be Camden or a Philly now.  Even from NJ 18 in New Brunswick it seems strange to use Trenton there, but it is.

As far as I-80 I think Stroudsburg, Hazleton, and Williamsport to be used for lack of major point of interest. I-70 runs into that same scenario in Kansas as west of Topeka you have Denver as the next major city too far still to use. However Texas uses El Paso from San Antonio a good nine hours away and also plenty of open space between as well. So TexDOT would gladly use Cleveland or Youngstown for sure.

[famartin]

Exit 8A in Jamesburg uses Trenton when locals there would more likely use CR 535.  At that point it should be Camden or a Philly now.  Even from NJ 18 in New Brunswick it seems strange to use Trenton there, but it is.

From 8A, with no traffic, 3 routes are almost exactly the same length, so traffic would dictate how you'd get to Trenton if you used GPS/phone directions.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/40.342728,-74.4692685/Trenton,+New+Jersey/@40.2678014,-74.6875243,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c143482d3dbbb9:0xcf16567f895cd7bc!2m2!1d-74.759717!2d40.2205824!2m3!6e1!7e2!8j1616378400!3e0

From 9, with no traffic, US 1 is the clear winner, though the edge isn't great.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/40.4703468,-74.4086723/Trenton,+New+Jersey/@40.327222,-74.58131,11.5z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c143482d3dbbb9:0xcf16567f895cd7bc!2m2!1d-74.759717!2d40.2205824!2m3!6e1!7e2!8j1616378400!3e0

In any case, the discontinuity of using "1 South/Trenton" from the Parkway southbound is nuts... most people would probably take 95 or 95 to 18 to 1. So, theoretically, if they had signed US 1 from the parkway properly in the first place (Metuchen or New Brunswick are better), they'd have never done the right thing at 129 southbound by signing Philly... it would've and still would say "Trenton", just as northbound says.

As far as I-80 I think Stroudsburg, Hazleton, and Williamsport to be used for lack of major point of interest. I-70 runs into that same scenario in Kansas as west of Topeka you have Denver as the next major city too far still to use. However Texas uses El Paso from San Antonio a good nine hours away and also plenty of open space between as well. So TexDOT would gladly use Cleveland or Youngstown for sure.

I had thought that perhaps "Cleveland" would be more appropriate for 80 westbound, but its SO far... then again, if we used MDTA rules (which ignore Wilmington and Philly in favor of New York), then that's exactly what NJDOT should sign for 80 westbound... Cleveland.

[roadman65]

If IDOT had control it would be Cleveland at I-95 and I-287. Paterson (as it is now) from local roads east of that city. Dover from Paterson to Dover. Then Stroudsburg west of Dover they would use.

Eastbound Dover, Paterson, and Fort Lee ( maybe New York, as on I-70 IDOT did drop East St. Louis for St. Louis on local ramps).

[ilpt4u]

If IDOT had control it would be Cleveland at I-95 and I-287. Paterson (as it is now) from local roads east of that city. Dover from Paterson to Dover. Then Stroudsburg west of Dover they would use.

Eastbound Dover, Paterson, and Fort Lee ( maybe New York, as on I-70 IDOT did drop East St. Louis for St. Louis on local ramps).

If ISTHA had control...
80 WB: Pennsylvania
80 EB: New York

[Ketchup99]

If I ran the New Jersey Turnpike, its control cities would be:
Northbound: New York City up to the Lincoln Tunnel exit, The Bronx north of there (at the split, sign Manhattan on the exit for 495 and Bronx on the Turnpike)
Southbound: Newark to I-280, Philadelphia to Exit 6, Baltimore from there

As for I-80 in PA, I'm not sure why it needs to be a city along the route. State College, Williamsport, and Scranton would all be perfectly workable. Personally, I'd not mind having a primary control city (e.g. Sharon, State College, Willilamsport, Scranton, Stroudsburg) and also a secondary one (New York EB, Ohio WB) the whole way.

[akotchi]

The Turnpike is an odd beast because it splits from I-95. So which do you sign? I understand why the Turnpike is signed to Camden and then Wilmington. I'm fine with that approach. North of I-95... I know traffic uses 7A to Trenton but I'm not sure how much. Again, I don't really have an opinion here. In general, as long as you don't pull a Pennsylvania and sign every podunk city in your own state instead of the major ones in the neighboring states, you're fine in my book. (Which is why I love how I-80 is signed to DWG in New Jersey as a "fuck you".)

What also does not help here is that the "official" control cities for I-95, as published by AASHTO, may not have been updated since the I-95 re-routing in 2018.  The control cities through this region are Wilmington, Chester, Philadelphia, Trenton, New York City, and have been for a long time.  With the change, Trenton is probably the only one that now becomes questionable.  NB north of Exit 9 becomes tricky because of how large NYC is and all the different ways to get there.

That is as far as I am willing to go right now . . . 

[PHLBOS]

FWIW, and I believe I mentioned similar either several pages back on this thread or in another related-thread, the use of Trenton for I-95 and/or NJTP signage is justified because of it being NJ's Capital & such comes within 20 miles of the actual I-95/NJTP corridor. 

From the north, one encounters the Trenton area prior to approaching Philadelphia. 

From Philly via I-95 northbound, such is still the most direct way to the Trenton area despite I-95 itself no longer being in close proximity to the actual city.  Even in its pre-Sept. 2018 alignment and/or had the Somerset Freeway been built, I-95 never actually goes through nor enters Trenton.  One would simply follow I-95 northbound from Philly to I-295 (formerly I-95) to the US 1 northbound interchange near Langhorne to access the city.

NB north of Exit 9 becomes tricky because of how large NYC is and all the different ways to get there.

Such is probably one reason why the current northbound I-95/NJTP pull-through signage at Exits 10 through 13A do not list any control city/point on them.  Personally, I don't fully agree with such an approach but it is what it is.
Interestingly, the northbound pull-through sign at Exit 14 (I-78) lists Geo. Washington Bridge.

In any case, the discontinuity of using "1 South/Trenton" from the Parkway southbound is nuts... most people would probably take 95 or 95 to 18 to 1. So, theoretically, if they had signed US 1 from the parkway properly in the first place (Metuchen or New Brunswick are better), they'd have never done the right thing at 129 southbound by signing Philly... it would've and still would say "Trenton", just as northbound says.

FWIW, prior to the ramp from the GSP southbound to US 1 northbound being built; the GSP southbound Exit 130 ramp signage featured a New Brunswick/Trenton pairing for US 1 southbound.  After the interchange was modified, the primary signs for the US 1 South ramp simply listed Trenton with New Brunswick being relegated to supplemental sign status. 

One has to wonder if the reasoning for such signage may have been due to either I-195/NJ 29 not yet being fully completed at the time the new ramp was built or nobody bothered to check that a new direct-highway connection to Trenton from the NJTP existed/was completed.

While the southbound GSP Exit 129 signage recently replaced Camden with Philadelphia; the northbound GSP Exit 129 signage and the I-95/NJTP southbound signage beyond the toll plaza still list Trenton.  The much earlier (70s vintage) sign for the latter also listed Trenton as well.

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Does anyone know if the truckers lounge with the showers at Vince Lombardi is coming back? Or is that gone forever?

[bluecountry]

Traffic sign engineer breaking in for a moment: If you have multiple options leading to a single destination city, it is appropriate to differentiate between them. For example, you will commonly see "Bridgeport next 7 exits" and then the next 7 exits are just street names. Or maybe 1-2 of them are route names with other destinations. The intrigue comes when not every exit leads to the city in question. You can take 14, 16E, or 18W/18E to the city. 15E, 15W, and 16W are not preferred and you wouldn't really list NYC as destinations for those. 15X won't get you there at all. This does pop up from time to time, and since it's a unique edge case, it is not fully covered by the MUTCD, and this is when to use engineering judgment. Fun fact about engineering judgment, no two engineers will see it the same way - I'll ask 1-2 others who I trust and go for a general consensus on what the "likely best way" is.

In this case, in a vacuum, I would probably have a sign south of 14:
NEW YORK CITY
Holland Tun.......Exit 14C
Lincoln Tun.......Exit 16E
G W Br.....Exits 18W/18E

Exit 14 I would sign I-78 Newark / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Holland Tun Exit 14C".
Exit 16E I would sign NJ 495 Weehawken / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "Lincoln Tun Exit 16E".
Exit 16W I would sign NJ 3 Clifton / Secaucus, with supplemental sign "Lincoln Tun Exit 16W".
Exits 16E/18E I would sign I-95 TO I-80 Paterson / New York, with supplemental sign(s) "G W Br follow NORTH (95)"
Off each interchange, I would make sure to point people down the correct ramp to head east, and that's that.
Your mileage may vary.

Can you please weigh in on the NJTP SB and the idiotic use of Trenton not Philadelphia?

I can't. The Turnpike Authority is responsible for destinations on their facility. The FHWA is responsible for approved destinations along Interstate highways. Where or if the two of them disagree... that's between them.

Do you agree Philadelphia should be the control city on the NJTP south?

No.  It should be Baltimore.

That is asinine.

-NJTP should be Philadelphia past the GWB to exit 6.
-South of exit 6 it should be Wilmington
-NB NJTP  should be NYC until 14
         14-Holland/Lower Manhattan
         16-Lincoln-Midtown
         18-GWB-Bronx
-80 W should be Paterson, then WB/S

[Alps]

That is asinine.

Be nice.