Transportation forum may gain clout Princeton Packet, December 7, 2001
Meadow Road overpass will open before holidays, The Trenton Times, November 12, 2001
Sitting in traffic costly to Jerseyans The Star-Ledger, October 10, 2001
Controversial road projects bucked to task force Princeton Packet, August 17, 2001
W. Windsor board OKs traffic plan The Trenton Times, August 17, 2001
Hightstown Bypass speed hike OK'd The Trenton Times, August 9, 2001
West Windsor finds itself at a crossroad The Trenton Times, August 3, 2001
Traffic of future discussed The Trenton Times, June 13, 2001
Residents see red over traffic study results The Trenton Times, June 8, 2001
W. Windsor weighs a wider Route 1 The Trenton Times, June 6, 2001
Solution sought to traffic woes, The Trenton Times, June 5, 2001
Transportation forum may gain clout
By: David Campbell, Staff Writer December 07, 2001
Until now a think tank generating traffic analyses and bright ideas, the Central Jersey Transportation Forum soon could wield real clout through the development of state legislation and regional policy-making.
John Coscia, executive director of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), which acts as moderator for the transportation forum, asked members last week to compile a legislative agenda based on the organization's statistical findings on sprawl and traffic congestion.
The transportation forum is expected to lobby for development-rights transfers that would enable municipalities to protect open spaces by concentrating future growth, with the understanding that higher-density areas would become nodes for light-rail or express bus transit systems, said Marvin Reed, Princeton Borough mayor and forum member.
The forum also is expected to seek state support for municipalities confronted by costly legal battles with landowners over zoning changes that are intended to comply with the State Development and Redevelopment Plan, Mayor Reed said.
Princeton Borough Councilwoman Wendy Benchley urged colleagues on the forum to "use the political clout in this room. This is a powerful group."
Federal, state and local officials sit on the forum alongside representatives of regional business interests and nonprofit advocacy groups.
The forum convened in 1999 to address issues and concerns raised by the public in a congestion-management study of the Millstone Bypass.
The forum went on to generate a series of traffic and land-use studies indicating that primary roadways in the area soon will reach or exceed full capacity, whether or not new roads or transit alternatives are built.
Land use is "the most significant" component to transit solutions, and to implement changes there will be need for incentives, some of them requiring legislative action, the forum has found.
The forum may evolve to assume some policy-making authority of its own, Mr. Coscia said.
The forum could become a board under DVRPC similar to the agency's tri-county water-quality board for Burlington, Camden and Gloucester counties.
The water-quality board meets quarterly and sets policies and procedures, but has no budgetary oversight, Mr. Coscia said.
He said the forum has been "very successful" and could become a similar board for land-use and transportation issues for Central Jersey.
But "this really hasn't been pursued or discussed in very great detail," Mr. Coscia said.
Mayor Reed told the forum there has been talk in the state Legislature in the past of creating a separate metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for Central Jersey.
MPOs administer state and federal transportation funds for urbanized areas with populations over 50,000, and are the primary agencies responsible for coordinating transportation planning within the boundaries of those areas.
Mayor Reed said Wednesday it is "conceivable" the forum itself or some version of it could take on the new role
But the mayor indicated a central New Jersey MPO in any form is still a long way off.
The governor would be required to make a formal request to the federal government in order to create a new MPO, of which there are two already operating in New Jersey.
The DVRPC is the federally sanctioned MPO for the area comprising Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties in Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Gloucester and Mercer counties in New Jersey.
The North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority is the MPO for the 13-county North Jersey region, and oversees more than $1 billion in annual transportation funding.
Meadow Road overpass will open before holidays
11/12/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- State officials hope to complete the Route 1 overpass at Meadow Road within the next few weeks, easing traffic congestion along the corridor in time for the holiday shopping season.
The traffic light in front of the MarketFair shopping complex will be removed once the overpass is open, according to Jim Hadden, a spokesman for the state Department of Transportation.
"If it continues to be nice (weather) for the next couple of weeks, we're confident we'll have it done the first week of December," Hadden said. "Everything is going to be weather dependent."
Even if the project takes an extra week or so to complete, workers are still several months ahead of schedule. The $12.8 million project was slated for completion in June.
Hadden said cooperative contractors and good weather have helped move the project along.
"We're going to make sure traffic can move safely through there," Hadden said. "You're going to be able to get on Meadow Road and get across Route 1 in both directions."
Workers were slated to complete the final concrete-pouring Friday and finish installing guardrails and signs in the coming weeks.
Hadden said the barriers that prevent access to Farber Road just south of Meadow Road will be removed once workers finish underground utility work, but that will likely occur after the overpass is opened.
"Eventually those are going to come out of there," Hadden said.
Although the overpass will improve traffic along the corridor, Hadden said there is still a lot of work to be done to entirely eliminate congestion along Route 1.
Removing the light at Meadow Road may move traffic further south to Nassau Park Boulevard, where a temporary light still operates, Hadden said. State officials announced several months ago that they hope to remove that light after they assess the effect of the Meadow Road overpass on traffic.
"Until we get a good transportation plan for the entire corridor, traffic is always going to be a problem on Route 1," Hadden said.
© 2001 The Times
Sitting in traffic costly to Jerseyans
10/10/01
This is from the Associated Press, via the Star-Ledger:
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Traffic congestion in New Jersey costs $7.3 billion a year in lost time, fuel and additional vehicle operating costs, according to a study released yesterday by the New Jersey Institute of Technology.
The report takes into account the cost of fuel and delays in getting goods to their destinations. Researchers also used county-by-county personal income data to measure the cost of hours spent stuck in traffic in each county.
Counties in North Jersey -- especially Bergen -- are the most congested and have the highest traffic-related costs, according to the report. Statewide, the annual cost of sitting in traffic is $1,255 per licensed driver, with 45 lost hours.
"Congestion is a very expensive proposition," said state Transportation Commissioner James Weinstein, whose
agency funded the study.Recommendations to ease congestion include advanced technology, such as high-speed E-ZPass and traffic
signals that detect the flow of traffic, as well as regular government funding. The report also urges employers to
make more use of staggered work hours and telecommuting.The study advocates retaining tolls. Stopping to pay tolls is often cited as a major cause of traffic congestion, especially on the Garden State Parkway.
Acting Gov. Donald T. DiFrancesco, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bret Schundler and Democratic
gubernatorial candidate Jim McGreevey all have put forth plans to eliminate the Parkway toll plazas."The issue that ought to be addressed is eliminating congestion on the Parkway, not eliminating toll revenue,"
said NJIT provost William C. Van Buskirk.The report was completed before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington and so does not
reflect the disrupted traffic patterns since.Van Buskirk added that congestion carries important safety and security risks in the wake of the attacks.
"We must be able to move safely and efficiently," he said.
Copyright 2001, The Associated Press
Controversial road projects bucked to task force
By: Gwen Runkle, Staff Writer August 17, 2001
New Alexander Road bridge among the projects to get more review.WEST WINDSOR - After examining the local capital-improvement plan road by road, the Township Planning Board on Wednesday unanimously approved the traffic-circulation element of the draft Master Plan.
But most of the more controversial road-improvement issues - including the Alexander Road bridge alignment, the widening of Clarksville Road and the Edinburg Bypass - were not addressed in detail. Those three were among the 29 road and intersection improvement projects, scheduled to occur between 2007 and 2017, which were marked for the Princeton Junction and Edinburg special study task force to deal with.
The task force, which includes seven neighborhood representatives and board members Bill Benfer, Gretchen Fahrenbruch and Steve Decter, was created to tackle land use and traffic issues within the Princeton Junction and Edinburg areas and is expected to have its first meeting in early September.
"We felt it was unfair to approve certain delineations or road widths in areas we said were going to be separated out for special study," said Township Councilwoman and Planning Board member Jackie Alberts.
The board will likely vote on the final draft of the Master Plan before the special study is complete and add its changes at a later date, said board attorney Gerald Muller.
Of the projects the board did discuss, three were deleted from the list. Two involved building an extension of the Millstone Bypass from Washington Road to Alexander Road between 2007 and 2011 and the other called for the widening of Route 571 from four to six lanes between Clarksville Road and Old Trenton Road after 2017. In addition, the board reduced the amount of widening scheduled for Route 1 after 2017.
The capital-improvement plan calls for the widening of Route 1 between Interstate 195 and Meadow Road.
"Where there are six lanes, there would be eight, and where there are eight lanes, there would be 10," said traffic consultant Gary Davies.
Several board members asked that the Route 1 project be removed from the plan, citing how it would benefit visiting traffic rather than local residents and would be crossing over into another township's territory.
According to Mr. Davies, 40 percent of the employees along Route 1 commute from Pennsylvania.
"Why should we be on the record advocating a 10-lane Route 1 when the bulk of that traffic is regional?" Ms. Alberts asked.
Ms. Alberts suggested the board instead take a stronger position advocating mass-transit options, such as bus, light rail or shuttles for local residents and people commuting to West Windsor.
Board member Pat Greber pointed out that the length of Route 1 between Interstate 195 and Quakerbridge Road is in Lawrence Township, not West Windsor, and he felt the board needed to deal only with the portion located in the municipality's jurisdiction.
"We shouldn't be dictating to other townships," he said.
Chairman Ed Steele disagreed. "I see no reason to take it out," he said. "2017 is far enough out. Let's leave it there and see what happens."
As a compromise, the board left the project in the plan, but limited the widening to eight lanes between Quakerbridge Road and Meadow Road.
©Packet Online 2001
W. Windsor board OKs traffic plan
08/17/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Short of building a moat and a drawbridge, township officials have few ways of controlling traffic flow -- especially on crowded Route 1.
But planning board members this week used one of the most pivotal tools -- the master plan -- to at least advocate their positions to state and county authorities who control many of the critical arteries in the township.
The board unanimously voted to approve the traffic element of the master plan draft that calls for expanding Route 1, which is owned by the state, to eight lanes between Quaker Bridge Road and Meadow Road sometime after 2017.
"The traffic demands show that there is a need to widen Route 1 at least one lane in each direction," said traffic engineer Gary Davies. "It's a very difficult project to handle. The township should at least put it in the master plan as something to be advocated."
Planning board members stopped short of advocating for the proposed expansion to 10 lanes on Route 1 between I-295 and Quaker Bridge Road.
But state officials say they don't have any plans to expand the corridor.
"The (Department of Transportation) has no plans to add another travel lane in each direction in that area," said spokesman John Dourgarian. "We've been removing traffic lights, which will help with the traffic flow a great deal."
According to Dourgarian, the state plans to study the corridor's traffic flow once the Meadow Road overpass is complete near the end of the year to determine if it can remove the traffic light at Nassau Park Boulevard.
That light has been considered temporary even though it has been in place since the mid-'80s, Dourgarian said.
The removal of the light was included in the approved traffic plan although Kevin Moore, Nassau Park Pavilion's lawyer, said improvements need to be made to make sure traffic doesn't clog Quaker Bridge Road."The owner is working with the DOT to put those mitigating things in," Moore said. "It is in everyone's interest not to have backups."
The planning board has opted to wait for studies to be completed on Princeton Junction and Edinburgh Village before voting on road expansion projects in those areas.
The board at Wednesday's meeting eliminated a proposal to expand Route 571, Princeton-Hightstown Road, to six lanes between Clarksville Road and Old Trenton Road -- a central pathway to the New Jersey Turnpike.
"I just don't want anyone to think we want Princeton-Hightstown Road as a route to the Turnpike," said Chairman Ed Steele.
The traffic plan also advocates a mass transit system -- either bus or light rail -- near the Route 1 corridor, and a bus system on peripheral roadways. Such a mass-transit system could serve Washington Township commuters traveling to Route 1, planning board member Jackie Alberts said.
"West Windsor does not have the housing density to support it, but there's concentrated housing in Washington Township that could potentially support one end of the bus route," she said.
All road projects included in the plan are subject to change -- a likely event since the planning board is facing a host of unknown elements that will greatly influence traffic flow throughout town.
For example, the future of both the Sarnoff Corp. and BASF sites is uncertain because the board hasn't yet taken a final vote on the amount of allowable development on the sites.
The state Supreme Court won't rule until the fall on the Toll Brothers case, in which the developer plans to build 1,165 units of housing here.
And, the state is likely two years away from deciding on the project formerly called the Millstone Bypass that will determine what road -- if any -- will be constructed to ease traffic congestion in Penns Neck.
The planning board is scheduled to vote on the land-use elements of the master plan draft on Aug. 29.
Copyright 2001 The Times
Hightstown Bypass speed hike OK'd
08/09/01
By ANDREW H. FIXMER
Staff WriterEAST WINDSOR -- After a six-month investigation into the nearly two-year-old Hightstown Bypass, the state Department of Transportation has agreed to raise the speed limit from 45 to 50 mph and allow motorists heading to the New Jersey Turnpike to turn right when the light at Route 33 is red.
The changes proposed by the DOT closely reflect local concerns about the bypass, formally known as Route 133 -- which many say is underused. The road has eased the amount of New Jersey Turnpike-bound traffic traveling on Route 571 that often clogged downtown Hightstown.
"Their process was a positive one and the DOT has shown in this situation a real desire to work with the township and to be sensitive to local concerns and suggestions," said Mayor Janice Mironov. "And certainly if further issues should arise I would feel confident that we could reach out and sit down with them to discuss those items as well."
The state-mandated review is done to address safety issues on newly built roads and highways, said John Dourgarian, a DOT spokesman, and is not specifically aimed at increasing use of the roadway.
"This process is done with any new roadway; you always strive to improve safety. From an operational standpoint, these were items the department felt, even in respect to the speed limit, that would be appropriate to do," said Dourgarian. "And that is why, the only reason why, these proposals were submitted to the township."
Tense relations regarding the bypass have occurred between Hightstown -- which is surrounded by East Windsor -- and the township, where the entire length of the bypass is located.Hightstown would like to reroute all traffic bound for Turnpike that cuts through its downtown to the bypass, but East Windsor argues the bypass was not designed for that purpose.
Borough Mayor Amy Aughenbaugh did not return calls made to her home regarding the results of the bypass review. Hightstown officials were not consulted or part of the review process, according to municipal and state officials.The 3.8-mile, $65 million highway was opened Dec. 1, 1999, to ease congestion in downtown Hightstown and provide an alternate route for motorists traveling between Turnpike Exit 8 in East Windsor and Route 1 via Route 571.
Now that the review process is completed, the DOT said it will concentrate on implementing the changes over the next few months.
"Unless there is a specific issue that comes up or a future problem, this would be (the end if our review process)," said Dourgarian. "The review is a one-time thing."
But Mironov said she still has some issues with the DOT concerning damage remaining from when the highway was built."This letter reflects the operational review aspects of the roadway, but there are some outstanding issues. Restoration of some areas of our community . . . that stem more from the actual construction work and the failure to remedy those areas that were disturbed in our community," she said, noting that construction equipment damaged some roads and surrounding areas.
"The state has indicated their intention to properly have that work finished up, and they have taken some steps," Mironov said. "There is a major area along One Mile Road that was basically destroyed during the construction and they have done some grading and seeding there to fix that but there is more work that needs to be done."
The state DOT said in a letter to Mironov it will make the following changes to the bypass:
-- Placement of yield signs on the ramp from Route 133 westbound to Route 571 westbound.
-- Revisions to pavement markings from the ramp from Route 133 westbound to Route 571, delineating two lanes for 571 westbound and lane markers for the upcoming left-turn-only lane for Old Trenton Road.
-- Relocation of existing route signs and supplemental signs on 571 eastbound for access to Route 133 eastbound and Windsor Center Drive to ease motorists' confusion on the use of the jughandle for Route 133 and to eliminate illegal turns onto Windsor Center Drive.
-- Evaluate the position of the signal pole at Route 33 westbound for Route 133 westbound.
-- Relocate route designation signs on Route 33 westbound.
-- Removal of a route designation sign for Route 133 placed on Route 130 southbound in front of the New Jersey State Police barracks and replacement with a post-mounted sign. This is expected to be done by the end of September.
-- Evaluate, in conjunction with local law enforcement, how and where to construct an emergency turn-around on Route 133.
-- Removal of the no-turn-on-red" sign at the intersection of Milford Road and Route 33.Copyright 2001 The Times
West Windsor finds itself at a crossroad
08/03/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- If township officials yield to residents who don't want their congested streets widened, they would be paving the way for an even more hellish commute, according to area planners and traffic engineers.
Residents of Alexander, Clarksville and Princeton-Hightstown roads have loudly objected to plans to widen sections of each roadway. They have taken that position despite a traffic study that shows the roads will soon be above capacity regardless of any growth at the Sarnoff or BASF sites on Route 1.
"The sense is that residents are willing to put up with the congestion on those roads, including the neighborhood streets," said Ed Steele, planning board chairman. "The residents feel this is better than widening, and the board will probably go along with that wish."
But regional transit and planning officials say it isn't up to West Windsor officials to make such big decisions because the roads play such a pivotal role in moving traffic around busy Route 1.
The roads provide different access points for those traveling from East Windsor and the New Jersey Turnpike not only to Route 1, but also to downtown Princeton Borough."Any type of road improvement happens within a context," said Jon Carnegie, a senior project manager for the Rutgers University Transportation Institute. "The decision needs to include the desires of local businesses and residents, but it also needs to consider what the road is intended to do -- certainly a regional perspective is important."
Alexander Road is owned by the township, but the ultimate decision on any improvements along Princeton-Hightstown or Clarksville roads lies with Mercer County officials because the roads are under county jurisdiction -- a point not lost to planning board member Jackie Alberts.
"The fact that the roads should reflect the character of the neighborhoods is a sentiment I share," Alberts said. "But what we're talking is not in our control. If West Windsor controlled the Millstone Bypass, it would have been built already."
County planner Donna Lewis said the county doesn't have any specific plans for the roads since officials there are currently revising their own master plan, but she said the county typically works very closely with local municipalities when pursuing road expansion projects.
"Their opinions are going to carry weight," Lewis said. "We haven't seen exactly what they're doing, but in a master plan, all you're doing is preserving the right-of-way in the future."
The board's official decision on any road-widening projects is likely weeks away. That's because the board opted to separate review of the Princeton Junction section of town, which includes the roadways, from its general review of the master plan draft, which provides a basic outline for future development in the township and calls for the roads to be widened.
"A number of key decisions on road improvements are really going to be deferred until that study is completed," said Gerald Muller, the board's solicitor.
The township has already given approval for about 5 million square feet of development in addition to the existing 7 million square feet, which means increased traffic is inevitable, traffic engineer Gary Davies told the board in early June.
Davies warned the board that if the township didn't widen the roads, traffic would be pushed onto local roads and foster additional back-ups.
But Paul Lalli, a Berrien City resident, said he thinks it's possible to come up with a plan to minimize congestion without damaging his neighborhood.
"We do need to limit the widening of those roads," said Lalli, one of many residents who has gathered to voice collective opposition to proposals in the draft. "And we need a plan that prevents cut-through traffic."
Dianne Brake of the Regional Planning Authority said she respects the concerns of local residents, but as a daily traveler of Princeton-Hightstown Road, she is all too familiar with its traffic jams.
"The cars already make four lanes out of two lanes and no one knows which lane to be in," said Brake. "There is no protocol for it."Brake believes a four-lane system with a median -- a proposal that was rejected more than 10 years ago -- could solve the area's pedestrian and traffic problems.
"It has more to do with how it functions and how it's designed," said Brake, who is also a member of the Central New Jersey Transportation Forum. "You could actually build that area to improve it for both pedestrians and for traffic."
Planning board members are now reviewing the capital improvement plan that outlines road projects in order to determine those with the highest priority.
The planning board began its review of the traffic circulation elements in the master plan draft on Wednesday night and plans to continue that review on Aug. 15.
A final vote on the traffic proposals will come after the board decides on whether to reduce the amount of allowable development on the Sarnoff or BASF sites -- a decision that could bring thousands of additional commuters to the area if development springs up on the sites.
Copyright 2001 The Times
Traffic of future discussed
06/13/01
By JAKE MENSCH
Staff WriterTRENTON -- The state Department of Transportation held a public meeting in City Hall yesterday to present a plan on how to handle the effects a projected 1.2 million population increase in the next 25 years will have on
the state's congested transportation network.Jim Lewis of the DOT stressed the plan is not to throw money into new projects, but to preserve, maintain and improve the existing systems.
The plan suggests a variety of ways in which travel in the state can be made easier, including:
-- The use of car pools and other group-travel strategies to reduce the number of single-occupancy vehicles on the road.
-- An augmentation of the bus system to reach a larger commuter base.
-- Discussions with businesses to make work hours more flexible so workers can avoid rush hours.
-- A variety of high-tech solutions such as E-ZPass and real time roadside traffic report systems.Only 2 percent of the plan's budget is allocated for new roadways and the widening of existing ones, as these are the most expensive projects to implement, Lewis said.
For the city, the DOT suggests adding more night-shift bus drivers to accommodate people who do not work day jobs, adding bus routes to transport those who live off existing routes, improving access to the city from major highways and installing more road signs to help people get to the city.
Route 1 was mentioned specifically as needing more signs. The DOT is to present the plan, called Choices 2025, to the governor by July 1.
Copyright 2001 The Times
Residents see red over traffic study results
06/08/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- The township's rapidly growing traffic problems have caused an uproar among some residents who say proposals to widen several roads will only increase traffic and be dangerous for pedestrians.
About 75 residents turned out at a meeting Wednesday night, many of them to question and criticize parts of the township traffic study that suggestswidening parts of Alexander and Clarksville roads to ease
congestion."We are encouraging traffic through our community instead of discouraging traffic," Karen Bhame said. "The quality of life and the children crossing the street are the most important things," she said.
The township's traffic engineer, Gary Davies, said the expansion likely would push more vehicles onto the bigger roadways, but traffic probably will flow onto local roads if the township doesn't pursue the expansion.
Davies said without the widening the township could face the same problems found in nearby Princeton Borough, which has faced burgeoning traffic on local roadways since borough leaders opted more than a decade ago not to expand Nassau Street.
"It is possible to draw the traffic demands and capacities together, but it's going to take a major initiative to do it," Davies said. "Many of the Bergen County communities are facing traffic like this."
The township has given out permits for about 5 million square feet of development across the township, and another 3 million square feet is proposed on the Sarnoff Corp. site, which means increased traffic generally
is regarded as inevitable.According to Davies, the traffic within the township eventually will exceed roadway capacity regardless of what changes are made to the road infrastructure or the township's development standards.
But he said the board's recent tentative decision to reduce the amount of allowable development from 30 percent to 21 percent on the Sarnoff and BASF sites, and other critical steps must be taken to postpone and reduce the
inevitable congestion as much as possible.Davies fielded numerous questions from residents after completing his hourlong traffic presentation during the planning board's review of the master plan draft. Planning board members have been in the hot seat the past few weeks during reviews of the draft to come up with traffic solutions, but most members were silent Wednesday as residents took turns questioning Davies.
"There are no easy solutions," said Jim Rothenberg, a former planning board member. "The question is how you build roads to strike a balance between (tax) ratables and quality of life."
The planning board voted several weeks ago to postpone discussion of any proposals regarding the Princeton Junction and Edinburgh Village sections of the township after several suggestions sparked controversy among residents.
Neighbors are now working on traffic and construction suggestions to present to the board by the end of the summer. Several residents urged the board not to make decisions regarding traffic until after those presentations. "That seems to have a potentially major impact on circulation," said Jen Ping Wang.
Many residents said they want to make sure those two areas are safe for pedestrians. "Eventually someone is going to get killed on Alexander Road," Jennifer Crawford said. "Something horrible is going to happen."
Other residents questioned proposals to widen Route 1 in some sections and the validity of the state's plan to remove all of the traffic lights along the township section of the Route 1 Corridor. "All that will do is make it more dangerous," said Paula McGuire.
Davies said most township roadways probably will not be widened in the near future, but he urged the board to consider laying the groundwork for such expansions by pushing future development farther off the roads.
The board will continue to review the traffic study at Wednesday's planning board meeting at the municipal building.Copyright 2001 The Times
W. Windsor weighs a wider Route 1
06/06/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- A section of commuter-clogged Route 1 in Mercer County may eventually be widened to include more lanes than most of the state's superhighways, according to the township's master plan draft.
Traffic congestion could force the state to widen the highway to 12 lanes between Interstate 295 in Lawrence and Meadow Road in West Windsor, the draft shows.
It would make that roughly 2 1/2-mile stretch wider than most sections of the Garden State Parkway, the New Jersey Turnpike, I-295 and the Atlantic City Expressway.
Traffic predictions included in the draft suggest the expansion may be needed regardless of the amount of future development on the Sarnoff Corp. and BASF properties that border Route 1 here.
State plans call for eliminating every traffic light along West Windsor's section of the highway, which could foster the slow transformation of what is now a commercial corridor.
But planning board members, who are slated to review the traffic study tonight, say they are eager to come up with other solutions, and that construction -- if it occurs at all -- is more than 15 years away.
"You can't pave over the whole world with blacktop," said Charles Morgan, a planning board member. "Even if you build more, you might get more congestion. We're going to have to find some radical solutions."
Traffic congestion along Route 1 has become a nightmare for commuters and has sent officials in municipalities along the highway searching for solutions.
Area residents have filed into township planning board meetings en masse in recent weeks to review a host of suggested traffic solutions offered in the master plan draft.
Intersection improvements and a proposal for a light-rail system to run along the corridor have been suggested in the document to ease traffic, but board members have heard criticism from every corner.
The board faces the struggle of accommodating development that increases the township's tax base while trying to maintain high living standards. Planning board member Steven Jany said the township's plan for a light-rail system would need to be implemented along the corridor before construction of a 10- or 12-lane highway could occur.
"Otherwise you might as well be in California and walk to work," Jany said.
All board members acknowledge a light-rail system would be extremely costly, and many suggest it would fail because it would not serve residential areas. That would increase pressure from the public to come up with a solution using the roadways.
Any expansion of Route 1 would have to be initiated by the state Department of Transportation, which has already begun several steps to ease congestion along the busy highway.
An overpass at Meadow Road under construction near the MarketFair shopping mall will eliminate one traffic light. Plans are in the works to eliminate another at Nassau Park Boulevard after the Meadow Road work is done.
Four traffic lights -- one at Fisher Place, one at Harrison Street and two at Washington Road -- could be eliminated if the state proceeds with plans for the Millstone Bypass.
The state is now working on an environmental impact statement to determine if the bypass -- which would originate on Route 571 in West Windsor, cross above Route 1 and eventually rejoin Route 571 east of Princeton Borough -- will be built despite protests from Princeton Borough officials who say the road will push more traffic into downtown Princeton.
State officials will determine future planning for Route 1 once that assessment is complete. The master plan draft also suggests the elimination of the traffic light at Carnegie Center Boulevard, which would allow Route 1 traffic to flow through the township without a single traffic light.
Part of the draft calls for widening parts of Alexander and Clarksville roads to four lanes in an effort to ease traffic congestion near Route 1. But residents also have objected to that plan, fearing it would damage the
character of their neighborhoods.The draft plan points out a number of the difficulties associated with roadway widening -- specifically the number of businesses that would have to be uprooted to build the extra lanes.
More than 2 million square feet of development is slated for construction along the corridor in the next few years. An additional 3 million square feet is included in Sarnoff's plans for a massive "technology campus," which could bring in up to 6,000 more workers daily if the planning board approves development there.
Anticipated development on the BASF site once BASF leaves next summer also will likely bring more traffic. "The board needs to review all of the circulation points brought out in the draft and decide what's appropriate," said planning board Chairman Ed Steele.
The master plan provides a blueprint for future development, but does not set any mandates. Gary Davies, the township's traffic engineer, is slated to present an extensive traffic study at tonight's planning board meeting.
It is unclear when the board will vote on the traffic section of the draft.Copyright 2001 The Times
Solution sought to traffic woes
06/05/01
By KAREN AYRES
Staff WriterWEST WINDSOR -- Traffic proposals in the township's master plan draft are so objectionable to some residents that they have formed their own group to come up with solutions acceptable to people in several neighborhoods.
Members of Princeton Junction Communities represent five areas of town that could face the biggest increases in traffic if the township realigns Alexander Road -- a congested, two-lane road that has become a traffic nightmare for commuters -- and the bridge that carries the road over the Amtrak tracks south of the Princeton Junction Train Station.
The master plan draft, now under review by the planning board, suggests three ways to realign the bridge, but residents feel any of those would push traffic into one or more residential neighborhoods and possibly dash hopes of creating a "downtown" Princeton Junction Village area.
"We want to develop the Princeton Junction Village plan for all of West Windsor, said Paul Lalli, a resident of the Berrien City section and leader of the group. "We have an opportunity with the regional train station to be an outstanding example to the rest of New Jersey if we do the right thing."
Members of the group feel increased traffic in the Berrien City area or near developments like Benford Estates, Sherbrooke Estates and Windsor Haven would change the character of the town and discourage pedestrians.
"Residents in an area with a lot of traffic should have at least the convenience of being able to walk," said Joseph O'Shea, president of the Windsor Haven Homeowners Association. "Where this bridge goes is really putting the cart before the horse. The real question is what Princeton
Junction Village is going to look like." Increased traffic also raises concerns about getting fire and emergency services through the township, O'Shea said.The planning board voted several weeks ago to postpone discussion of the realignment proposals and the Princeton Junction Village plan until after the board has voted on the master plan draft, because of overwhelming resident protests.
Group members plan to meet weekly to develop solutions to present to the board by summer's end, leaders say. Two residents from each development met with township officials last week to
discuss traffic proposals with traffic engineer Gary Davies and John Madden, a township planner."Everything is on the table," said Mike Hornsby, a Berrien City resident. "We're working together on this. The character of the whole area will be affected by whatever these outcomes are."
The master plan draft specifically endorsed one proposal to move the bridge closer to the train station, which would send traffic through the Berrien City neighborhood. The second option calls for aligning Alexander Road with North Post Road south of the existing bridge, eliminating the existing curve on North Post Road. That option would require widening Clarksville Road to four lanes near Maurice Hawk Elementary School and West Windsor-Plainsboro High School South.
Clarksville Road residents have responded in protest with hordes of bright green signs. The last proposal maintains the existing alignment, but calls for placing a traffic light at Alexander and North Post roads. That proposal calls for widening Alexander Road through Berrien City.
Many residents believe proposals to move the bridge and alter the traffic flow have been offered as a compromise for the Millstone Bypass, which some people believe will never be built because of great objections from Princeton residents.
Traffic throughout the township will change greatly depending on whether the state Department of Transportation decides to proceed with plans for the bypass, which would originate on Route 571 in West Windsor, cross over Route 1 and eventually rejoin Route 571 east of Princeton Borough.
"The bypass has a direct effect on what happens in Princeton Junction," Lalli said. "We need to work with that and accommodate whatever solution there is at a traffic level."
The state is working on an environmental impact statement likely to determine the fate of the project. West Windsor residents think the bypass would reduce congestion on Route 1, but Princetonians fear traffic would be funneled into downtown Princeton Borough.
|
|
|
|
|