Start your 7-day free trial — unlock full access instantly.
← Back to Search
Lead Closed
This opportunity is no longer accepting submissions.
Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge Concept Development Report
BID #: CY22-065
ISSUED: 4/15/2024
DUE: TBD
VALUE: $10.08M
100
Rating
Risk Rank
Green Risk
AI-Powered Lead Insights
Executive Summary
This is a Concept Development (CD) phase study for a pedestrian bridge over Route 440 in Bayonne, NJ. The bridge will connect the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail (HBLR) Station to the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH), aiming to provide safe pedestrian and bicycle access across the busy highway. The PABH is currently undergoing redevelopment to include mixed use businesses and residential housing, which has created a need for this connection. TYLin International has prepared the CD study for the City of Bayonne.
Web Content
Automated discovery link found on Bayonne website.
Document Text
--- Document: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge Concept Development Report Document ---
Concept Development Report
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Concept Development Study
April 15, 2024 ― Contract #CY22-065
City of Bayonne
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
2 |
Table of Contents
I.
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 6
A.
Foreword ........................................................................................................................................... 6
B.
Original and Successor Projects ........................................................................................................ 6
C.
Data Reviewed .................................................................................................................................. 7
D.
Design Standards .............................................................................................................................. 8
E.
Characteristics of the Roadways and Surrounding Areas ................................................................. 8
F.
Concept Development Scope Statement .......................................................................................... 9
G.
CD Public Involvement Action Plan ................................................................................................... 9
II.
Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................................... 10
A.
Bridge Needs ................................................................................................................................... 10
B.
Scour Needs .................................................................................................................................... 10
C.
Maintenance Needs ........................................................................................................................ 10
D.
Roadway Needs ............................................................................................................................... 10
E.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Needs ......................................................................................................... 10
F.
Goals and Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 11
III. Existing Inventory and Condition ........................................................................................................ 12
A.
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Condition ................................................ 12
1.
Pedestrian ................................................................................................................................... 12
2.
Bicycle ......................................................................................................................................... 13
B.
Existing Bridge Inventory and Condition ......................................................................................... 13
C.
Scour ............................................................................................................................................... 14
D.
Maintenance Issues ........................................................................................................................ 14
E.
Existing Roadway Inventory and Condition .................................................................................... 14
1.
Highway Classification ................................................................................................................ 14
2.
Speed Limit .................................................................................................................................. 14
3.
Access Level ................................................................................................................................ 14
4.
Major Roadway Cross Section Elements ..................................................................................... 15
5.
Horizontal Alignment .................................................................................................................. 16
6.
Vertical Alignment ...................................................................................................................... 17
7.
Intersection Sight Distance ......................................................................................................... 17
8.
Surface Type ................................................................................................................................ 17
9.
Hydraulics and Drainage ............................................................................................................. 17
10.
Clear Zone ............................................................................................................................... 18
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
3 |
11.
Guide Rail ................................................................................................................................ 18
12.
Lighting .................................................................................................................................... 18
13.
Signing ..................................................................................................................................... 18
14.
Pavement Marking .................................................................................................................. 18
15.
Curbs ....................................................................................................................................... 18
16.
Access ...................................................................................................................................... 19
17.
Landscaping ............................................................................................................................. 19
F.
Geotechnical ................................................................................................................................... 19
G.
Existing Utilities ............................................................................................................................... 19
H.
Summary of Existing Deficiencies ................................................................................................... 20
I.
List of Substandard Design Elements .............................................................................................. 20
J.
Management Systems Input ........................................................................................................... 20
K.
As-built Plans, Right of Way Maps, and Jurisdiction Map .............................................................. 20
IV. Traffic and Crash Summary ................................................................................................................. 21
A.
Traffic Operations ........................................................................................................................... 21
B.
Traffic Data ...................................................................................................................................... 22
C.
Traffic Volume Forecasts................................................................................................................. 22
D.
Crash Data Analysis and Crash Diagram ......................................................................................... 22
V.
Social, Economic, and Environmental Screening ................................................................................ 23
A.
Community Outreach ...................................................................................................................... 23
1.
Stakeholder Meeting #1 .............................................................................................................. 23
2.
Stakeholder Meeting #2 .............................................................................................................. 23
3.
Public Information Center ........................................................................................................... 24
4.
Project Website ........................................................................................................................... 24
5.
City Council Meeting ................................................................................................................... 24
B.
Noise and Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 24
C.
Socioeconomics............................................................................................................................... 24
D.
Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................................... 25
E.
Section 4(f) Properties .................................................................................................................... 25
F.
Highlands/Pinelands ....................................................................................................................... 25
G.
Wetlands ......................................................................................................................................... 25
H.
Reforestation .................................................................................................................................. 26
I.
Floodplain........................................................................................................................................ 26
J.
Sole Source Aquifer ......................................................................................................................... 26
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
4 |
K.
Threatened/Endangered Species .................................................................................................... 26
L.
Category 1 Waters .......................................................................................................................... 27
M.
Vernal Pools ................................................................................................................................ 27
N.
Stormwater ..................................................................................................................................... 27
O.
Hazardous Waste ............................................................................................................................ 27
P.
Anticipated Environmental Permits or Approvals .......................................................................... 28
Q.
Environmental Summary with Probable NEPA Document Required .............................................. 28
VI. Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives ................................................................................................ 28
A.
Bridge Rehabilitation Versus Bridge Replacement ......................................................................... 28
B.
Temporary Bridge Location and Widening Constraints .................................................................. 28
C.
Conceptual Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 28
1.
Alternative 1 – At-grade Crossing at Goldsborough Drive .......................................................... 29
2.
Alternative 2 – Single Span Steel Truss Bridge ............................................................................ 30
3.
Alternative 3 – Two Span Sleek Concrete Bridge ........................................................................ 31
4.
Alternative 4 – Single Span Simple Girder Bridge ....................................................................... 32
D.
Traffic Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33
1.
Existing Conditions Analysis ........................................................................................................ 33
2.
Growth Factor for Future Traffic Projection ............................................................................... 33
3.
2045 Design Year Analysis........................................................................................................... 34
E.
Hydrology & Hydraulics Analysis ..................................................................................................... 34
1.
Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis ............................................................................................... 34
2.
Stormwater Management .......................................................................................................... 35
F.
Right of Way Impacts and Review .................................................................................................. 35
G.
Utility Impacts ................................................................................................................................. 35
H.
ITS Facilities ..................................................................................................................................... 36
I.
Complete Streets Policy .................................................................................................................. 36
J.
Access Impacts and Review ............................................................................................................ 36
K.
Constructability and Staging Plans and Detour Plan ....................................................................... 37
1.
Alternative 1 ................................................................................................................................ 37
2.
Alternative 2 and Alternative 4 ................................................................................................... 37
3.
Alternative 3 ................................................................................................................................ 37
L.
Controlling Substandard Design Elements and Reasonable Assurance.......................................... 38
M.
Construction Cost Estimate ......................................................................................................... 38
N.
Value Engineering Study and Report .............................................................................................. 39
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
5 |
O.
Life Cycle Cost Analysis ................................................................................................................... 39
P.
Alternatives Matrix ......................................................................................................................... 39
Q.
Risk Analysis Summary .................................................................................................................... 39
R.
Discussion with Subject Matter Experts ......................................................................................... 39
S.
Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA) ......................................................................................... 39
T.
Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement ..................................................................................... 40
VII. Concept Development Recommendation .......................................................................................... 40
A.
Interagency Review Committee (IRC) Approval of Report ............................................................. 40
Appendices
A. Problem Statement Charter ........................................................................................................... 41
B. Bridge Re-evaluation Survey Report .............................................................................................. 42
C. Bridge Scour Evaluation Report ..................................................................................................... 43
D. As-built Plans, ROW Maps, and Jurisdictional Map ....................................................................... 44
E. Tax Maps ...................................................................................................................................... 114
F. Crash Data .................................................................................................................................... 119
G. Traffic Counts ............................................................................................................................... 124
H. Aerial Plan and Photographs ........................................................................................................ 175
I.
Straight Line Diagram ................................................................................................................... 183
J. Traffic Volume (VPH) Graphs ....................................................................................................... 185
K. Collision Diagram ......................................................................................................................... 204
L. Environmental Screening and Constraint Map ............................................................................ 217
M. Conceptual Alignments, ROW Impacts, Environmental Constraints, Bridge Staging,
Profile, and Local Detour ............................................................................................................. 261
N. Public Communications ............................................................................................................... 279
O. Design Communications Report .................................................................................................. 360
P. Resolutions of Support................................................................................................................. 368
Q. City of Bayonne and NJDOT Communications ............................................................................. 378
R. Cost Estimates .............................................................................................................................. 523
S. Alternatives Matrix ...................................................................................................................... 564
T. Risk Register ................................................................................................................................. 566
U. Quantitative Risk Analysis Report ................................................................................................ 568
V. Utility Risk Assessment Plan ........................................................................................................ 569
W. Complete Streets Checklist .......................................................................................................... 571
X. Life Cycle Cost Analysis ................................................................................................................ 583
Y. Systems Engineering Review Form .............................................................................................. 584
Z. Preliminary Engineering Public Involvement Action Plan ............................................................ 585
AA. Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement .................................................................................. 591
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
6 |
I. Introduction
A. Foreword
This report documents the results of the
Concept Development (CD) phase study
for the Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Between the 34th Street Hudson Bergen
Light Rail (HBLR) Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH).
The City of Bayonne, funded by a Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) grant
through the New Jersey Department of
Transportation
(NJDOT)
Local
Aid,
initiated this CD study in order to
develop concepts for a proposed
pedestrian bridge.
The proposed bridge will connect the
34th Street HBLR Station to the PABH.
The PABH is 620 acres of land which was
the former Military Ocean Terminal,
Bayonne (MOTBY). The government
decommissioned the former military
base in the late 1990’s and turned it over
to the City of Bayonne. Extensive redevelopment efforts have resulted in approvals for 8,349
housing units and more than 1.5MSF of commercial properties, public parks, and the Hudson
Riverfront Walkway. The site contains a passenger ship terminal and dry dock on land owned
and operated by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), and a planned ferry
terminal. Successful completion of this project will enhance intermodal connections and Transit
Oriented Development (TOD).
B. Original and Successor Projects
There is no existing pedestrian bridge over Route 440 at the project location. However, there
are existing structures, roadways, and recent development at the project site.
In 1994, the NJDOT performed a significant project along the Route 169 (currently Route 440)
and Route 185 corridor from 30th Street to just north of Port Jersey Boulevard. This project
included grading, drainage, roadway widening and reconstruction, structures and track
relocation work and barring upgrades made along the corridor over the past 30 years, which
essentially constructed the roadway conditions that exist within the project limits today.
In the early 2000’s a pedestrian bridge connecting New Jersey Transit’s 34th Street HBLR Station
platform with their parking lot was constructed west of Route 440. When this project was
designed and constructed, provisions for a future pedestrian bridge over Route 440 were
included in the design details.
In approximately 2010, Goldsborough Drive was constructed and a signalized intersection was
created at the Route 440/Goldsborough Drive intersection.
Figure 1 - Aerial View of Bayonne; Project Location Circled in Red
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
7 |
Development of the PABH began in earnest in 2004 with the construction of the Cape Liberty
Cruise Port. Residential and commercial development was subsequently initiated in 2008 and
has continued with relative consistency since that time..
C. Data Reviewed
Numerous sources of data were obtained and studied in order to form a comprehensive
understanding of the project area, project components, and stakeholder opinions. The data
utilized to compile this report came from multiple sources including the City of Bayonne, the
NJDOT, NJ Transit, utility companies, and field inspections. For this CD report, the following
information was reviewed, studied, and utilized.
Existing Plans Provided by the City of Bayonne, NJDOT, and NJ Transit
-
Existing Conditions, Proposed Pedestrian Bridge Route 440 Jersey City Hudson County,
New Jersey, Matrix New World Engineering, dated 3-06-2016. (Appendix D)
-
Site Plan & Wire Elevation Diagram, Goldsborough Drive & Route 440 Pedestrian
Bridge, City of Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey, CME Associates. (Appendix D)
-
Bayonne Local Development Authority Major NJDOT Highway Access Permit,
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, Plans of Route 440 N.J. 169 SEC.1 (1959) G.P.S., Sec. 1G
(1992) D From Lefante Way to South of 40th Street, Grading, Paving and Traffic Signal
improvements. Dated 3/26/09. (Appendix D)
-
General Property Parcel Map, Route 440 (1953) Section 2 From Route U.S. 1 & U.S. 9
(Truck) to Bayonne Bridge. Dated 12/6/13. (Appendix D)
-
As-built Survey, Tax Lot 2, Block 721, Route 440 East & Goldsborough Drive, City of
Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey. DPK Consulting. Dated 10/20/2020. (Appendix
D)
-
Preliminary/Final Major Site Development for Costco Wholesale, Block 700 Lot 1, City
of Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey. Maser Consulting P.A. Dated 6/27/17.
(Appendix D)
-
NJ Transit Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System, MOS-1, As-built Drawings, Volume
8 of 16, Structural. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. (Appendix D)
-
State of New Jersey Department of Transportation Plans of Route 169 (1953) Sections
1G & 2H, Route 185 (1953) Section 1D From Vicinity of 30th St. to Harbor Drive,
Grading, Drainage, Roadway Widening & Reconstruction, Structures and Track
Relocation, Cities of Bayonne and Jersey City, Hudson County, As-built. Hardesty &
Hanover. Dated 10/11/94. (Appendix D)
Supplemental Information and Data Provided by the City of Bayonne
-
Existing CAD files for Route 440 and Block 721 Lot 2 provided by the City of Bayonne.
-
Tax Maps provided by the City of Bayonne. (Appendix E)
-
Crash Data from 1/1/2019-9/22/2022 provided by the City of Bayonne Police
Department. (Appendix F)
Supplemental Information and Data Provided by the NJDOT
-
Straight Line Diagram provided by the NJDOT. (Appendix I)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
8 |
D. Design Standards
The following design standards were used as part of this concept development study.
-
Roadway Design Manual, 2015, New Jersey Department of Transportation (RDM)
-
Design Manual for Bridges & Structures, Sixth Edition, 2016, New Jersey Department
of Transportation
-
Cost Estimating Guideline, February 2019, Program Management Office, New Jersey
Department of Transportation
-
Design Exception Manual, 2019, New Jersey Department of Transportation
-
State of New Jersey Complete Streets Design Guide, 2017, New Jersey Department of
Transportation
-
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 7th Edition, 2018, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
-
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition,
Including Revision 1 dated May 2012 and Revision 2 dated May 2012, Federal Highway
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation
-
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 8th Edition, September 2017, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
-
N.J.A.C. 7:8 Stormwater Management, March 2, 2020
-
NJ State Highway Access Management Code
E. Characteristics of the Roadways and Surrounding Areas
Route 440 is an Urban Principal Arterial roadway running south to north. In the project area it
carries two to three northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. The northbound and
southbound lanes are separated by a concrete median barrier. The NJDOT Straight Line Diagram
indicates the posted speed limit is 50 mph within the project limits which has been determined
to be incorrect. Based on the NJDOT Traffic Regulation website, the posted speed limit is 40
mph from the southern project limit up to 500 feet north of Prospect Avenue (approximately
MP 20.66 to 21.28). The posted speed limit then increases to 45 mph to Pulaski Street
(approximately MP 21.28 to 21.87) therefore placing the project within two posted speed limits.
The width of the roadway is approximately 96’ at the location of the proposed pedestrian
bridge. A complete description of the existing roadway can be found in Section III.E.
The proposed pedestrian bridge will be located immediately south of the Goldsborough Drive
intersection with Route 440. The east landing of the bridge will be constructed within the
existing grass island (owned by the City of Bayonne), located between Route 440 NB, CVS
parking lot and Goldsborough Drive.
West of the project location along Route 440 is the existing NJ Transit pedestrian bridge at the
34th Street HBLR Station, the HBLR tracks, and freight railroad tracks owned by NJ Transit and
operated on by NJ Transit and Conrail.
East of the project location along Route 440 is the PABH development where adjoining
development is commercial and includes CVS, Lidl, Starbucks, LA Fitness, and Costco (among
other business). A 4’-0” wide asphalt walkway runs along Route 440 NB between Goldsborough
Drive and Port Terminal Boulevard. Additionally, there are underground and overhead utilities
along Route 440 NB. Further east on the peninsula down Goldsborough Drive exist numerous
residential communities including luxury apartments and townhomes. These include Citizen
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
9 |
Bayonne, Harbor Pointe, and Bayonne Bay to name a few. Further east past the residential
developments are a UPS warehouse and shipping facility, dry docks, the Cape Liberty Cruise
Port, and the Tear Drop memorial. The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway occupies the
shoreline adjoining Goldsborough Drive.
North of the Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive intersection, Route 440 does not provide any
direct access to residential or business destinations. The roadway carries traffic to and from the
interchange for exit 14A of the New Jersey Turnpike. There is no designated pedestrian or
bicycle access north of Goldsborough Drive along Route 440.
South of the project area are Port Terminal Boulevard and Prospect Avenue, and the signalized
intersection of Route 440 and E 32nd Street/Lefante Way. Lefante Way provides access to the
South Cove Commons, a shopping center containing businesses such as Stop and Shop, TJ Maxx,
Houlihans, among a dozen or more other businesses. Lefante Way also provides access to
numerous warehouse properties and the Bayonne Golf Country Club to the east of South Cove
Commons. To the west of the Route 440 and E 32nd Street/Lefante Way intersection are
residential single family and multi-family homes and access to downtown businesses along
Avenue E and Broadway.
F. Concept Development Scope Statement
A formal Concept Development Scope Statement was not prepared for this project. However,
the scope for the Concept Development phase of this project follows the current NJDOT Project
Delivery Process for Concept Development Projects.
G. CD Public Involvement Action Plan
A CD Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP) was prepared at the beginning of the project in
order to establish the public involvement process that is dynamic in nature so that it can evolve
Figure 2 - Aerial View of Area Surrounding Proposed Bridge
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
10 |
with the progress of the project and serve as a framework for public involvement throughout
the subsequent phases of the projects development (Preliminary Engineering (PE), Final Design,
and Construction).
The CD PIAP for this study identified critical points for public involvement. Each point includes
the intended audience, a tentative schedule, objectives, strategies, and deliverables. The CD
PIAP includes the following primary components.
-
Stakeholder Coordination Meetings (two meetings)
-
Public Information Center (PIC) to reach a broader group of stakeholders and the
public (one meeting)
-
Town Council Presentation (one meeting)
-
Digital engagement including the development of a project website.
II. Purpose and Need
The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian crossing connecting pedestrians and
bicyclists from the east side of Route 440 just south of Goldsborough Drive to the west side of Route
440 at the 34th Street HBLR Station. Effectively, this bridge would connect Bayonne “Proper” (where
most of its residents are located) to recently developed residential and commercial properties on
the east side of Route 440. The development of these new uses has introduced an intense demand
for pedestrian and bicycle access across Route 440, where there are no safe options presently
available for crossing.
A. Bridge Needs
There is no existing pedestrian bridge over Route 440 at the proposed location. The needs of
the existing NJ Transit pedestrian structure are outside the scope of this Concept Development
Study.
B. Scour Needs
The proposed location and the existing NJ Transit pedestrian structure does not cross over a
water body; therefore, scour needs are not applicable to this project.
C. Maintenance Needs
There is no existing pedestrian bridge over Route 440 at the proposed location and therefore,
maintenance needs do not apply. The maintenance needs of the existing NJ Transit pedestrian
structure are outside the scope of this Concept Development Study.
D. Roadway Needs
There are no immediate roadway needs which are driving the initiation of this project. However,
a minimum vertical clearance of 17’-0” must be maintained over Route 440 and consideration
must be given to meeting the required stopping sight distance to the traffic signal at the Route
440/Goldsborough Drive intersection.
E. Pedestrian and Bicycle Needs
With newly constructed residential housing and shopping destinations at the PABH and
adjoining South Cove Commons retail center to the east of Route 440, there is an increased
demand for a safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing of Route 440. A safe pedestrian and bicycle
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
11 |
crossing of Route 440 would serve the needs of community members living in the PABH housing
so they could access destinations on the west side of Route 440 including the 34th Street HBLR
Station and destinations on Avenue E and Broadway. It would also serve the needs of
community members living west of Route 440, allowing them to safely access shopping
destinations such as Costco, CVS, Lidl, and the stores located in South Cove Commons as well
as the future ferry terminal, additional future commercial uses, and the Hudson River
Waterfront Walkway. Existing warehouses and those that are anticipated to open in the near
future or are under development will draw employees from Bayonne proper, and a portion of
those employees are anticipated to walk or bicycle to work. The existing pedestrian crossing of
Route 440 closest to the Goldsborough Drive intersection is an at-grade crossing at 32nd Street,
approximately 0.25 miles south of the project area. Because of this, many pedestrians and
bicyclists’ resort to crossing Route 440 wherever it is convenient for them, crossing Route 440
NB and hopping over the concrete median barrier before crossing Route 440 SB. Information
provided by the City noted that the Bayonne Police Department also observe pedestrians
crossing Route 440 in unsafe conditions within the project limits.
F. Goals and Objectives
A set of project goals has been developed
based upon the project’s Purpose and
Need Statement. The intent of the
project will be to fulfill the purpose and
address the needs while minimizing
utility, right of way, access, and
environmental impacts. The Goals and
Objectives of this study are as follows.
- Construct a safe, cost efficient, and
user-friendly pedestrian crossing of
Route 440 in the vicinity of the
intersection with Goldsborough
Drive.
- Link the 34th Street HBLR Station with
the PABH to facilitate and encourage
transit use.
- Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian bridge.
- Keep the public and stakeholders informed and aware of the project from the Concept
Development phase through the Construction phase.
- Minimize impacts to utilities, Route 440, and the stakeholders.
- Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical underclearance and sight distance to traffic signal.
- Minimize impacts to traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive during construction.
Figure 3 - Pedestrian Crossing Rt. 440 NB
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
12 |
III. Existing Inventory and Condition
A. Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Condition
1. Pedestrian
In the existing condition within the project limits, Route 440 NB has a concrete sidewalk
from the southerly limit of the project at the intersection of Route 440 and Lefante Way to
the intersection of Route 440 and Port Terminal Boulevard, and an asphalt sidewalk along
Route 440 NB from the intersection of Route 440 and Port Terminal Boulevard to northerly
limit of the project at Goldsborough Drive. Sidewalks do not exist along Route 440 SB, and
Route 440 SB is not suitable for pedestrian use. Along both eastbound and westbound
Goldsborough Drive there are existing “streetscape sidewalks”, with bricks and trees
between the curb line and the existing concrete sidewalk. There is no pedestrian access
from Route 440 or Goldsborough Drive to the existing NJ Transit 34th Street HBLR Station.
The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor includes a portion of The Hudson River Waterfront
Walkway (http://www.hudsonriverwaterfront.org/).The Walkway provides free access for
the enjoyment of the general public.
All the existing pedestrian ramps within the project limits were inspected in January 2023
for NJDOT ADA compliance. The figures below show a summary of the pedestrian ramp
inspection showing where Detectable Warning Surfaces (DWS) are missing, slope defects,
and ponding issues. Red dots note ADA deficiencies, green dots indicate ADA compliance.
Figure 4 - Intersection of Route 440 and Lefante Way/E 32 Street (Signalized)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
13 |
2. Bicycle
There are no existing dedicated bicycle facilities on either Route 440 or Goldsborough Drive
today, and the existing conditions are not suitable for bicycle use.
B. Existing Bridge Inventory and Condition
In the existing condition, there is no pedestrian bridge crossing Route 440 within the project
limits. There is an existing pedestrian walkway at the 34th Street HBLR Station on New Jersey
Transit’s property which connects pedestrians between a parking lot and the station platform.
This L-shaped pedestrian walkway has a pier in the northeast corner, and as-built plans for this
structure indicate that the east edge of the pier was designed to accommodate supporting a
future pedestrian bridge over Route 440. Based on TYLin’s visual inspection, the existing pier
appears to be in a satisfactory condition with the only notable features being some discoloration
Figure 5 - Intersection of Route 440 and Prospect Avenue/Port Terminal Boulevard (Unsignalized)
Figure 6 - Intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive (Signalized)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
14 |
of the pier cap and column possibly due to water staining and evidence of map cracking at the
bottom face in the southeast corner of the pier cap. Field reconnaissance confirmed anchor
bolts protruding out of the top face of the pier on the east side. A detailed structural inspection
will be required as part of the PE phase to verify the structural condition of the pier and its
suitability for supporting the proposed bridge.
The first two sheets of the as-built drawing set provided in the Concept Development Report,
which are titled “34th Street Station Pedestrian Bridge Roof Plan and Elevation Sheets 1 and 2”
by Raytheon Infrastructure Services Inc., show schematic views of piles at the piers; however,
foundation drawings are not available in the drawing set to confirm whether or not a pile
foundation was actually used. Based on the review of the available drawings, the existing pier
is likely founded on driven steel pipe piles. Confirmation of this assumption, and the load
capacity of the existing foundation, will be required as part of the PE phase.
The drawings for the “34th Street Station Pedestrian Bridges” provided by NJ Transit contains
notes pertaining to both the installation of piles and the preparation of foundation subgrades
and show an apparently shallow foundation at Pier 3. These items suggest that both shallow
and deep foundations were considered and may have been designed and constructed;
however, piles are not shown on any of the drawings provided. There are apparently four piers
designated 1 through 4. No additional information on the substructure was made available
beyond the above-cited drawings.
C. Scour
Scour is not a concern for this structure because it does not span over a waterway.
D. Maintenance Issues
There is no existing pedestrian bridge over Route 440 at the proposed location and therefore
there are no maintenance issues. The maintenance issues of the existing NJ Transit pedestrian
structure are outside the scope of this Concept Development Study.
E. Existing Roadway Inventory and Condition
1. Highway Classification
As per the NJDOT Straight Line Diagram, Route 440 is classified as an Urban Principal Arterial
roadway. Refer to Appendix I for the Straight Line Diagram.
2. Speed Limit
As stated in Section I.E and per the NJDOT Traffic Regulations, the highway speed limit
within the project limits changes from 40 mph to 45 mph at MP 21.28 in the vicinity of
Goldsborough Drive requiring a design speed of 45 mph to 50 mph respectively.
3. Access Level
The State Highway Access Management Code1 indicates that this portion of Route 440 has
an Access Level (AL) of 3, with a Desirable Typical Section (DTS) Code of 4A, which correlates
to a 114-foot Right-of-Way, and 4 lanes, divided, with shoulders or parking.
1https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/accessmgt/NJHAMC/pdf/16-
47Statehighwayaccessmanagementcode.pdf
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
15 |
Table 1 - Highway Data
Feature
Data
Reference
Classification
Urban Principal Arterial
Straight Line Diagram
Jurisdiction
NJDOT
Average Annual
Daily Traffic (AADT)
33,074 (2017)
Posted Speed Limit
40 mph
Field Inspection
Design Speed
45 mph to 50 mph at
MP 21.28
NJDOT RDM Table 2-1
Number of Lanes
2 (SB) / 3 (NB)
Straight Line Diagram/Field Inspection
Median Type
Concrete Barrier
Field Inspection
Lane Width
12’ (SB & NB)
Straight Line Diagram/Field Inspection
Roadway Width
24’ (SB) / 36’ (NB)
Shoulder Width
Varies from 0’-10’ (SB) /
Varies from 0’-14’ (NB)
Sidewalk Width
4’ – 6’
Field Inspection
4. Major Roadway Cross Section Elements
Route 440 has varying roadway cross sectional elements within the project limits between
E. 32nd Street/Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive. The roadway cross section elements
are listed in the bulleted list below.
Route 440 NB
- MP 20.98 - MP 21.04: Two 12-foot-wide lanes (and varies), one 14-foot-wide right
shoulder, one 3-foot-wide left shoulder, one 12-foot-wide right sidewalk.
- MP 21.04 – MP 21.10: Two 12-foot-wide lanes, one 14-foot-wide right turn only lane,
a left shoulder which varies from four feet wide to seven feet wide, and a 12-foot-
wide right sidewalk.
- MP 21.10 – MP 21.24: Two 12-foot-wide inside lanes, one 14-foot-wide (and varies)
outside lane, a left shoulder which varies from four feet wide to 10 feet wide, and a
sidewalk which varies from four feet wide to six feet wide.
Route 440 SB
- MP 20.98 - MP 21.06: Two 12-foot-wide lanes, one 14-foot-wide right turn only lane, a
right shoulder which varies from zero feet wide to 14 feet wide, a left shoulder which
varies from two feet wide to three feet wide, and a 6-foot-wide (and varies) right
sidewalk.
- MP 21.06 – MP 21.10: Two 12-foot-wide lanes, one 14-foot-wide (and varies) right
shoulder, one left shoulder which varies from three feet wide to four feet wide, and a
6-foot-wide right sidewalk.
- MP 21.10 – MP 21.18: Two 12-foot-wide lanes, one 15-foot-wide right turn only lane,
a right shoulder which varies from two feet wide to three feet wide, and a left
shoulder which varies from three feet wide to four feet wide.
- MP 21.18 – MP 21.24: Two 12-foot-wide lanes, one 15-foot-wide (and varies) right
shoulder, and one left shoulder which varies from four feet wide to 10 feet wide.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
16 |
Goldsborough Drive WB terminates at the intersection with Route 440, and it consists of
three 12-foot lanes, with one dedicated right turn lane and two dedicated left turn lanes.
Goldsborough Drive EB has two 12-foot lanes at the intersection with Route 440. There are
no existing shoulders on Goldsborough Drive in the immediate vicinity of its intersection
with Route 440.
i.
Cross Slope
Section 5.2.2 of the NJDOT RDM specifies a minimum cross slope of 1.5% for travel
lanes. A review as-built plans indicate that the minimum cross slope is 1.5%, therefore
the existing cross slopes within the project limits meet the minimum design
requirement.
Route 440 contains two horizontal curves. One has a radius of 6,600’ and lies within the
section of roadway whose design speed is 45 mph. The other has a radius of 3,250’ and
lies in the section of roadway whose design speed varies from 45 mph to 50 mph, with
the design speed of 50 mph governing. Per the NJDOT RDM Figure 4-C for the given
design speed, the required superelevation values for each curve are normal crown and
2.6% respectively. Based on review of the survey data, the superelevation value for
both horizontal curves meet minimum design requirements.
ii. Lane Widths
Section 5.3 of the NJDOT RDM specifies a desirable lane width of 12 feet, with a
minimum lane width of 11 feet on Urban Arterial roadways. A review of the survey data
for both roadways within the project limits reveals that the travel lanes meet the
minimum requirements.
iii. Shoulder Width
Section 5.4.2 of the NJDOT RDM specifies that a minimum outside shoulder width of
eight feet and a minimum inside shoulder width of three feet is required on Urban
Arterial roadways. The Route 440 outside shoulder within the project limits exceed the
minimum shoulder width where dedicated right turn and auxiliary lanes are not
present. There are NB and SB inside shoulders along the existing median barriers. Based
on a review of survey data and as-built plans, the existing inside shoulders meet or
exceed the minimum inside shoulder width of three feet.
iv. Roadside or Border Width
As per the NJDOT RDM, a minimum boarder width of 10 to 15 feet on Urban Arterial
roadways is required. A review of the survey data and as-built plans indicate that the
existing border widths within the project limits range from 10 to 15 feet therefore
meeting the design standards.
5. Horizontal Alignment
Review of the topographic mapping shows that there are two horizontal curves with radii
of 6,600’ and 3,250’ within the project limits. These radii exceed the minimum radii of 711’
and 926’ for the design speeds of 45 mph and 50 mph respectively as indicated on NJDOT
RDM Table 4-5. Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive intersect at a skew of 76.75 degrees.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
17 |
6. Vertical Alignment
Review of the roadway alignment shows that grades range from 0.5% to 1.3% for Route 440
SB and 0.6% to 1.3% for Route 440 NB. These grades meet NJDOT RDM Section 4.4.4 and
Table 4-8 requirements which establish minimum and maximum grades of 0.3% and 7%
respectively.
7. Intersection Sight Distance
i.
Signalized Intersection
The intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive is a signalized intersection. This
intersection was designed based on the assumption that a pedestrian bridge would be
constructed linking the 34th Street HBLR Station and PABH. Right turns from
Goldsborough Drive onto NB Route 440 are permitted. Based on a review of the
intersection geometry, intersection sight distance design criteria is met for these right
turns.
ii. Non-signalized Intersection
It is desirable to provide the minimum intersection sight distance (ISD) in order to
ensure that a motorist may safely enter or exit the roadway. However, as a minimum,
stopping sight distance for the approaching vehicle should be provided. The
recommended ISD value varies based on the mainline design speed, type of maneuver,
and type of traffic control imposed on the side road traffic.
The ISD for passenger cars was assessed as per Figure 6-A in the NJDOT RDM, for right
turns from Prospect Ave to Route 440 SB and Shopping Center Driveway to Route 440
NB. It was determined that the desirable intersection sight distance for vehicles making
the right turn from both areas does not meet NJDOT minimum ISD requirements. This
is because the existing stop bar and yield bar are set back from Route 440 and existing
trees, median, and utility poles block the view.
8. Surface Type
The existing surface type is a bituminous asphalt surface course with bituminous base
course, dense graded aggregate base course, and subbase below the surface course. The
overall pavement section is estimated to be approximately 27” thick.
Based on visual inspection, the pavement condition in both NB and SB directions of Route
440 within the project corridor is considered “Fair”. If any milling and paving is required for
this project, it is recommended to conduct pavement testing and perform pavement design
calculations.
9. Hydraulics and Drainage
Within the project limits, Route 440 is primarily superelevated, draining towards the PABH.
Towards the south end of the project, Route 440 transitions to a normal crown.
Goldsborough Drive has a normal crown throughout. Route 440 NB throughout the project
limits has existing concrete curbs with roadway runoff being collected in inlets along the
curb line. To the north of its intersection with Goldsborough Drive, Route 440 SB includes
half-section Jersey barrier at right shoulder, which ends at the intersection where runoff
then sheet flows to a field inlet off the edge of the roadway, while the left shoulder has a
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
18 |
concrete curbed median with inlets collecting runoff prior to the intersection. To the south
of the intersection with Goldsborough Drive, the right shoulder of Route 440 SB is not
curbed, and the runoff sheets flows under the guiderail into a ditch where it is then
conveyed to the outlet via a combination of pipes and ditches, while the left shoulder has a
concrete curb median that transitions to Jersey barrier with inlets collecting the runoff until
the roadway section fully transitions to a normal crown section. Goldsborough Drive
includes curb adjacent to the roadway in both directions. No signs of roadway drainage
ponding were observed throughout the project limits.
10. Clear Zone
Given the design speed, roadside slope, and design ADT, the clear zone may be determined.
Based on field observations, the only warranting obstruction within the clear zone is the
overhead cantilever sign structure located along Route 440 SB. This obstruction is currently
behind existing guide rail and the guide rail meets the length of need requirement.
11. Guide Rail
The only existing guide rail within the limits of the project is on Route 440 SB just to the
south of the intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive, in front of the existing
overhead cantilever sign structure. This existing guide rail is not compliant with the current
MASH standards and requires upgrade. Based on field observations, the northern end of
the guide rail is protected by sand barrels that appear to be damaged.
12. Lighting
Field investigations indicate that there are approximately seven NJDOT lighting standards
in the vicinity of the intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive. There are also
architectural lighting standards along Goldsborough Drive.
13. Signing
A new pedestrian bridge over Route 440 will likely visually impact the existing overhead
cantilever sign structure (if a sign is placed on the structure in the future) located
approximately 200 feet to the south of Goldsborough Drive. All the other existing signs
within the limits of the project are minor regulatory signs. A field visit was conducted on
January 12th, 2023 to inventory the signing shown on the approved traffic signal plans.
14. Pavement Marking
A field visit was conducted on January 12th, 2023 to inventory the pavement markings
shown on the approved traffic signal plans. The field inspection revealed that the existing
pavement markings along Route 440 are in poor condition. It is believed that the pavement
markings are in poor condition due to their age and the detrimental effects of weather,
leading to their cracking and fading.
15. Curbs
Along Route 440 NB, field reconnaissance indicates that the existing curb reveal is less than
the NJDOT’s standard 4 inches for curb reveal. There is no existing curb along Route 440 SB.
Along both the westbound and eastbound sides of Goldsborough Drive, the existing curbs
appear to be in good condition.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
19 |
16. Access
Field reconnaissance reveals that within the limits of the project, there are no existing
residential driveways located on either Route 440 or Goldsborough Drive.
17. Landscaping
Other than grass areas, field reconnaissance reveals that the only existing landscaping
within the project limits is streetscape tree plantings along both sides of Goldsborough
Drive.
F. Geotechnical
Review of surficial soil mapping from the New Jersey Geological Survey (NJGS) indicates
predominately glacial till soil to the west of Route 440, suggesting generally dense soil
conditions. Further west, the mapping indicates eolian (wind-borne) deposits and areas of fill
overlying glacial till. In addition, the map indicates evidence of rock outcrops which may have
been partially demolished as part of constructing the 34th Street HBLR Station and other
structures. During the site visit, outcrops were not observed at the 34th Street HBLR Station or
in the area of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive east of Route 440, which is occupied by
commercial buildings and parking lots with some grassy areas, or along Goldsborough Drive to
the east of Route 440. The surficial mapping indicates predominately estuarine and salt marsh
deposits and artificial fill to the east of Route 440, suggesting organic and peat soils underlying
artificial fill and, thus, relatively soft, compressible soil conditions.
A review of bedrock mapping from the NJGS indicates a complex bedding and dipping igneous,
metamorphic, and sedimentary rock types including diabase rock strata running approximately
northeast-southwest.
Along Route 440, at and to the north and south of the existing 34th Street HBLR Station, the New
Jersey Department of Transportation’s Geotechnical Data Management System shows historic
boring logs containing cinders, sand, silt, gravel, organic silt, and peat with indications of “oil”
and “oil coated” in some soil sample descriptions. Diabase is indicated in at least two borings at
depths of approximately 14 feet and 27 feet.
The above cited resources indicate fill and soft, compressible soil underlain by diabase bedrock
in the vicinity of Route 440 with a transition to fill and aeolian soils over glacial till underlain by
bedrock to the west. The boundary of this transition is not clearly defined by the resources
available. Consequently, soft organic and peat soils, fill, sand, silt, and gravel underlain by
bedrock may be present in the area of the anticipated foundation locations for the proposed
new pedestrian bridge crossing Route 440.
G. Existing Utilities
A Utility Contact Letter was sent out to each utility company that may have facilities within or
near the project limits to notify them of the pending work and to identify if they have facilities
that may be affected by the proposed work. The following utility facilities were confirmed
within the project limits.
- PSE&G Electric: PSE&G Electric has aerial facilities running along Route 440 NB.
- Williams: Has existing facilities within the project limits in the vicinity of Route 440 NB.
- IMTT: Has existing pipelines within the project limits in the vicinity of Route 440 NB.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
20 |
- City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division (Water): Existing facilities within the project
limits primarily in the vicinity of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive which are mainly
service lines.
- City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division (Sewer): Plans provided by the sewer division
indicate multiple combined wastewater pipes running along Route 440 and immediately
east of Route 440 NB at the northern project limits. There are also storm water pipes and
combined wastewater pipes indicated at the southern project limits. The plans also
indicate multiple catch basins and manholes within the project limits.
- Verizon (Telephone & Fiber Optic): Has aerial facilities within the project limits along
Route 440 NB.
- Cablevision/Altice USA: Fifth fiber, coax cable, and lightpath fiber aerial facilities running
in the north-south direction along Route 440 NB.
H. Summary of Existing Deficiencies
The following is a summary of the existing deficiencies and issues within the project corridor:
- The existing guide rail within the project corridor does not meet the current MASH
requirements.
- Intersection sight distance at non-signalized intersections does not meet design
requirements.
I. List of Substandard Design Elements
There are no Controlling Substandard Design Elements within the project limits.
J. Management Systems Input
As this project is being led by the City of Bayonne along with there being no existing bridge that
is being replaced, the typical shotgun letter to NJDOT Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) was not
distributed. However, technical input from individuals working for the City of Bayonne was
obtained in the data collection phase of the project. This included as-built development plans
for properties on PABH immediately adjacent to Route 440 as well as drainage and utility plans
from the Bayonne Local Redevelopment Authority Major NJDOT Highway Access Permit. The
noted plans received from the City of Bayonne can be found in Appendix D.
Input from the NJDOT SMEs was obtained during the combined Scope Team/Core Group
meeting held on May 4th, 2023. This meeting was attended by SMEs from Design
Standards/Geometric Solutions, Local Aid, Hydrology and Hydraulics (H&H), the Office of Bicycle
and Pedestrian Programs (OBPP), Geotechnical, the Bureau of Safety, Bicycle & Pedestrian
Programs (BSBPP), Traffic, Structures, Right of Way North, and Environmental. The minutes of
the Scope Team/Core Group meeting can be found in Appendix Q.
K. As-built Plans, Right of Way Maps, and Jurisdiction Map
As-built plans including Right of Way information can be found in Appendix D. The Jurisdictional
Limit Maps received during the data collection phase of the project are from approximately 1.5
miles northwest of the project area, are not applicable, and are not included in this report.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
21 |
IV. Traffic and Crash Summary
A. Traffic Operations
The goal of this study is to improve pedestrian accessibility across Route 440 in the vicinity of
Goldsborough Drive. Ongoing redevelopment along Goldsborough Drive to the east, known as
the Peninsula at Bay Harbor which includes mix use development, the 34th Street HBLR Station
to the west, the existing and proposed expansion of the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway to
the east among other factors has, and will continue to promote pedestrian demand and activity
within the study area. Route 440 is a four-lane principal arterial roadway with a center median
that creates a physical barrier and constraint for east west pedestrian mobility and accessibility
in the study area.
There are two existing signalized intersections within the study area at Route 440 &
Goldsborough Drive to the north and Route 440 & Lefante Way/E 32nd Street to the south. Both
signalized intersections provide an opportunity for a signal protected at grade crossing of the
highway. There is an existing crosswalk on the northerly approach of Lefante Way/ E 32nd Street
intersection across Route 440. There are currently no crosswalks at the Goldsborough Drive
intersection across Route 440. It is the intent of this investigation to assess traffic operations
and at grade pedestrian accommodations at each of the signalized intersections.
A traffic data collection program at the two locations was performed to ascertain their current
operational capacity and level of service (LOS). Synchro 11 was utilized to analyze existing year
2022 traffic conditions during the weekday AM and PM peak hours at the two study
intersections. The traffic model was developed using the intersection Turning Movement
Counts (TMCs) collected in October 2022 and lane geometry and signal timings observed during
a January 2023 site visit. The existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic
analysis results are as follows:
Table 2 - Existing Conditions (LOS/Delay)
Intersection
Movement
AM
PM
Route 440 and
Goldsborough Drive
Route 440 SB left turn
E / 70.7
F / 139.9
Route 440 SB through
A / 7.5
B / 12.9
Route 440 NB through
B / 13.6
C / 30.5
Goldsborough Drive WB left turn
E / 62.4
E / 74.2
Goldsborough Drive WB right turn
C / 31.9
C / 24.5
Overall Intersection
B / 19.9
D / 36.5
Route 440 and Lefante
Way/E 32nd Street
Route 440 SB through
B / 14.0
C / 31.1
Route 440 SB right turn
A / 1.1
A / 2.8
Route 440 NB through
C / 25.4
C / 24.0
Route 440 NB right turn
A / 6.2
B / 10.9
Lefante Way WB left turn
C / 32.1
C / 35.0
Lefante Way WB through
D / 39.6
D / 45.5
E 32nd Street through
E / 67.7
E / 68.5
Overall Intersection
C / 28.1
C / 34.1
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
22 |
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measurement meant to define the level of performance
and driver experience. LOS varies from LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A indicating free-flow traffic
conditions and LOS F indicating the amount of traffic exceeds (or close to exceeds) the capacity.
Delay is the average amount of time (in seconds) that a vehicle is delayed while traveling
through the intersection compared to free-flow traffic conditions.
B. Traffic Data
7-day/24-hour mid-block traffic counts were conducted in October 2022 along Route 440
between Goldsborough Drive and E 32nd Street/Lefante Way using Automatic Traffic Recorders
(ATRs). Utilizing the 2022 ATR traffic volumes and comparing to the traffic data available on the
NJDOT Interactive Traffic Count Reports website, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of Route 440
was determined to be 51,521.
Intersection TMCs were also conducted at the signalized intersections of Route
440/Goldsborough Drive and Route 440/E 32nd Street/Lefante Way. TMCs were conducted in
October 2022 from 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. on a Thursday and 11:00
a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on a Saturday. TMC’s counts included vehicle classifications, bicyclists and
pedestrians.
Pedestrian counts taken at the Route 440/E 32nd Street/Lefante Way intersection and the Route
440/Goldsborough Drive intersection are summarized in the table below. The numbers below
do not account for any pedestrians who may have crossed Route 440 illegally between the two
intersections.
Table 3 - Weekday Peak Hour Pedestrian Counts at Intersections
Route 440/E 32nd
Street/Lefante Way
Route 440/Goldsborough
Drive
Weekday AM Peak Hour
49
1
Weekday PM Peak Hour
70
4
Detailed traffic count data are provided in Appendix G.
C. Traffic Volume Forecasts
Design Year 2045 traffic projections were obtained using the average annual growth rate (1.0%)
from the current NJDOT Access Permit Annual Background Growth Rate Table for Hudson
County - Urban Principal Arterial. It should be noted that the City’s redevelopment initiative
known as “The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor” lies to the east of Goldsborough Drive, which
includes significant residential and commercial development. A portion of the redevelopment
has been completed to date and was therefore captured in the count data and signal analysis.
As noted, the design year analysis utilized an annual growth rate factor and did not consider
potential future volumes related to the remaining redevelopment build out.
D. Crash Data Analysis and Crash Diagram
Crash records from January 1, 2019, through September 22, 2022 were received from the City
of Bayonne for the entire length of Route 440 in Bayonne. These were narrowed down to only
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
23 |
include those crashes which occurred within the project area, which for the crash analysis, was
defined as on Route 440 between E 32nd St./Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive.
During this timeframe, there were 133 crashes reported within the project limits resulting in
zero deaths and 46 injuries. Same direction rear end and same direction side swipe (59% and
17% respectively) were the two most prevalent crash types during this period.
There was only one circumstance of a pedestrian involved accident within the time frame and
project limits. This occurred when a vehicle turning right from Lefante Way onto Route 440 NB,
struck a pedestrian crossing Route 440. This accident resulted in one injury.
These crashes are indicated on the Collision Diagrams in Appendix K.
V. Social, Economic, and Environmental Screening
The area of potential effects (APE) consists of project traffic study area and associated 300-foot
buffer. This document was prepared by utilizing federal, state, and municipal online databases and
performing one site visit. The site visit was conducted on October 25, 2022, to verify the accuracy
of the online data.
For Community Outreach efforts and formal notification of the Public Information Center, a buffer
of 350’ from the project limits was used to reach a broader audience.
A. Community Outreach
Engaging with the Bayonne community was a priority throughout the concept development
study to ensure an informed feedback loop. A variety of outreach opportunities were used to
seek input from Bayonne residents and community members. Public outreach efforts were
conducted both in-person and virtually. A hybrid approach was utilized in an effort to reach as
much of the Bayonne population as possible.
There were two virtual stakeholder meetings and one in-person Public Information Center held
for this study.
1. Stakeholder Meeting #1
The first Stakeholder Meeting was held virtually on December 16th, 2022 at 10:00am. This
meeting focused on reviewing the draft Project Fact Sheet and soliciting additional relevant
input on the project Purpose and Need Statement. Traffic data, environmental screening
information, various mapping activities, historical crash analysis, and other findings were
presented and reviewed by the Stakeholders. Minutes of this meeting can be found in
Appendix N.
2. Stakeholder Meeting #2
The second Stakeholder Meeting was held virtually on April 6th, 2023 at 10:00am. This
meeting focused on the alternatives analysis, including the process undertaken and
information on the benefits and challenges of each alterative, any necessary refinements,
and inputs on the selection of the PPA. Minutes of this meeting can be found in Appendix
N.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
24 |
3. Public Information Center
A Public Information Center was held in-person on August 2nd, 2023 at Bayonne City Hall
from 6:00pm-8:00pm. This event did not have a formal presentation, however, a
PowerPoint presentation was on loop and the public was able to ask questions to the
project team directly, as well as leave comment cards. A project summary handout was
available and given out to the public who attended. Display boards were presented to the
public with the information pertaining to the PPA, detour routes, and constructability. A
summary of this meeting can be found in Appendix N.
4. Project Website
A project website (https://34thstbayonnepedestrianbridge.com/) was created that was live
throughout the concept development study. The project website contains information
about the project study, including a project summary, select project documents, a calendar
of upcoming meetings, and a contact form. The public had the opportunity to
contact/engage with the project team at any point throughout the project. The project
website was posted in English and included instructions for translation into Spanish,
Portuguese, Polish, etc.
5. City Council Meeting
TYLin presented a brief background of the project as well as the alternatives studied to the
Bayonne City Council at their caucus meeting on August 9th, 2023. At the City Council
meeting held on the following Wednesday August 16th, 2023, the City Council passed a
resolution of support for the project in support of the PPA. The Resolution of Support can
be found in Appendix P.
B. Noise and Air Quality
Sensitive receptors for noise and air quality are located within 300 feet of the study area. As per
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the project area is in a non-attainment
area for 8-hour ozone, in a maintenance area for CO and in an attainment area for both PM-2.5
and PM-10. The proposed project type is listed in Table 2 of the USEPA Transportation
Conformity Rule; therefore, the project is exempt from the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)
and an air quality study is not required.
For noise quality, the project is considered a “Type III” project as defined in the FHWA
Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise and will not require
a noise analysis. Best management practices for air and noise quality pollution controls will be
employed due to the proximity to sensitive receptors.
C. Socioeconomics
The 2020 U.S. Census data indicates the population within Bayonne is comprised of 38.3%
minorities (statewide average 46.5%) and 12.4% of the population lives below the poverty line
(statewide average 10.2%).
Community facilities near the project study include public transportation facilities such as park
and rides, two bus stops and a rail station, grocery stores, a public access walkway to the Hudson
River and medical facilities. Although the project may have a temporary affect to traffic patterns
on Route 440 and access to the 34th Street HBLR Station during construction, the project will
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
25 |
not have disproportionately high or adverse effects on low income and/or minority
communities. The project is anticipated to provide a safe connection between the
redevelopment of the PABH and 34th Street HBLR Station for pedestrians and bicyclists.
D. Cultural Resources
A review of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) GeoWeb and the
NJ State Historic Preservation Office’s (NJSHPO) LUCY online databases concluded that the
study area includes the following individual identified properties:
- Goldsboro Village
- 250 Prospect Avenue
- 260 Prospect Avenue
- 452-456 Avenue E
- 573 Avenue E
- 585-587 Avenue E
Goldsboro Village has been demolished and replaced by Costco. The project does not include
involvement with any historic bridges. There are no historic districts within the study area.
Several residential structures older than 50 years are located within the study area. As the
project is federally funded, consultation with NJSHPO through Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 is required. As part of the City’s redevelopment of the Site, it
obtained a determination from the NJSHPO in 2002 that there are no historical properties of
interest on the property.
E. Section 4(f) Properties
The NJDEP’s Green Acres Program Recreational Open Space Inventory (ROSI) was reviewed to
identify any State, County, or municipally owned open space or recreation lands or any Green
Acres encumbered parcels within the study area. No Green Acres encumbered properties were
identified within the study area.
The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway is a pathway on the western shore of the Hudson River
in New Jersey. The Walkway provides free access 24/7 for the enjoyment of the waterfront by
the public. Access points to the walkway are located within the study area at Lefante Way &
Route 440 and Port Terminal Boulevard and Route 440. The Hudson River Waterfront
Conservancy works with NJDEP to monitor the usage of the walkway. The walkway requires
unobstructed access 24 hours a day, which should be maintained during construction.
F. Highlands/Pinelands
The proposed project is not located in the NJ Pinelands or NJ Highlands areas.
G. Wetlands
A review of NJDEP’s online geospatial database and the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map
was conducted to ascertain the presence/absence of wetlands within the study area. Estuarine
and marine wetlands associated with the Hudson River/Upper New York Harbor estuary are
located within the study area. A field visit also confirmed the presence of emergent wetlands
associated with a drainage ditch adjacent to Route 440 NB, in the vicinity of Costco. A basin is
located at the 34th Street HBLR Station adjacent to Route 440. Wetland delineation is
recommended in the PE phase to confirm jurisdictional boundaries of wetlands and transition
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
26 |
areas. It is anticipated that the project will not impact regulated freshwater wetlands, State
open waters, or transition areas.
H. Reforestation
Impacts to forested areas are not proposed. The No Net Loss Reforestation Act (NNL P.L. 2001
Chapter 10 Reforestation) is only applicable to State agencies that clear one-half acre or more
of forested area on State lands.
I. Floodplain
The Hudson River/Upper New York Harbor estuary is located in the study area. Available Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data
were reviewed to determine if project activities are proposed within the regulated Flood Hazard
Area (FHA). Preliminary FEMA FIRM Panel No. 34017C0111E (dated 1/30/2015) depicts the 1%
annual chance floodplain of the Hudson River/Upper New York Harbor estuary at elevation 13
feet (NAVD88). For tidal FHAs, NJDEP Method 2 for determining the FHA establishes the FHA
design flood elevation at equal to the FEMA 1% flood elevation. The Hudson River is classified
by the Surface Water Quality Standards (N.J.A.C. 7:9) as SE2 waters. A portion of the study area
located east of Route 440 is located within FEMA Flood Zone AE (EL 13’). The project proposes
fill in the tidal floodplain and requires a permit under the NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Control Act
Rules (N.J.A.C 7:13). The project is exempt from flood storage displacement limits per N.J.A.C.
7:13-11.4(d)1 for activities within a tidal flood hazard area. The anticipated riparian zone of the
Hudson River/Upper New York estuary is 50’ based on the attributes of the water. The drainage
ditch located in the vicinity of Costco appears to be concrete lined as per a review of as-built
plans. As such, the drainage ditch does not have a riparian zone. Impacts to the riparian zone
are not anticipated.
The City of Bayonne has a NJDEP Waterfront Development Master Permit for the
redevelopment of the waterfront within the study area. It is unknown if the proposed project
is included in the Master Permit or if the permit can be modified to include it. A review of NJDEP
geospatial data indicates that tidelands claims are present in the study area. Tidelands claims
are areas that are currently or formerly flowed by tidal waterbodies. All state tidelands claims
on PABH have been resolved and the City has secured a Statement of No Interest from the
NJDEP Bureau of Tidelands Management.
J. Sole Source Aquifer
According to the NJDEP GIS data, the study area is not located within a sole source aquifer.
K. Threatened/Endangered Species
A review of NJDEP’s Landscape Project data Version 3.3 was conducted to ascertain the
presence/absence of threatened or endangered species within the study area. The following
species are potentially located in the vicinity of the project:
- Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax)
- Little blue heron (Egretta caerulea)
- Tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor)
- Glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus)
- Snowy egret (Egretta thula)
- Cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
27 |
- Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus)
- Savanah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis)
- Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)
- Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus)
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS’s) Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC) Report identified the following federally listed species which may be present
within the study area:
- Tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus)
- Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus)
Section 7 consultation with the USFWS may be required during the PE phase due to the
potential presence of federally listed threatened and endangered species habitat within the
study area; however, the developed nature of the study area will likely preclude any
development restrictions based upon this habitat designation.
L. Category 1 Waters
There are no Category 1 Waters located within the study area.
M. Vernal Pools
According to the NJDEP Landscape Project Version 3.3 geospatial data layer, the study area does
not contain any vernal pools or potential vernal habitats.
N. Stormwater
The proposed PPA is not anticipated to be considered a major development by the Stormwater
Management rules at N.J.A.C. 7:8. Therefore, best management practices are not required.
O. Hazardous Waste
A review of NJDEP’s online database and the Radius Map™ Report was conducted to ascertain
the extent of existing environmental contamination within the study area. The review
concluded that there are documented hazardous waste sites, groundwater contamination
areas, deed notice areas, underground storage tank facilities, or brown fields located within the
study area. Ten regulated sites are in the vicinity of the study area and are summarized below.
The study area is also located in historic fill. The 34th Street HBLR Station park and ride is a
known contaminated site (KCS) and an active LSRP. Field reconnaissance confirmed a
groundwater monitoring well is present on this property.
- Harbor Pointe Market Place
- 34th Street HBLR Station Park & Ride
- Military Ocean Terminal (Deed Notice)
- NJ Light Rail Transit (Deed Notice & CEA)
- Bayonne Nipple Company
- Costco Gasoline (UST)
- Hicor Associates (UST)
- Bayonne Bus Garage (UST)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
28 |
The project proposes excavation within a groundwater contamination area and in the deed
notice extent. The City of Bayonne has an ongoing remediation plan and permits for this area
with NJDEP.
P. Anticipated Environmental Permits or Approvals
The project is considered a federal action and is subject to review per the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. In addition to NEPA, the following federal
authorizations or permits may be required for the project:
- Consultation with the NJHPO per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966.
- Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the USFWS
The following is a list of State Permits/Approvals/Coordination which may be required for the
project:
- NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Control Act Rules Permit-by-rule 9 for work within the tidal flood
hazard area.
- NJDEP Upland Waterfront Development Individual Permit for work above the MHWL if not
covered under the City’s Master Permit.
- Hudson Essex Passaic Soil Conservation District Certification.
- Compliance with the NJDEP Technical Requirements for Site Remediation and LSRP
Program for potential involvement with historic fill or regulated material.
Q. Environmental Summary with Probable NEPA Document Required
In summary, the environmental screening did not identify any “fatal flaws” that would prohibit
the advancement of this project. It is anticipated that the NEPA document required for this
project will be a Certified Categorical Exclusion Document (CCED), specifically 23 CFR
771.117(c)3–Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities. NJDOT
concurrence will be provided. The Environmental Screening Report can be found in Appendix
L.
VI. Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives
A. Bridge Rehabilitation Versus Bridge Replacement
There is no existing bridge over Route 440 at the proposed location.
B. Temporary Bridge Location and Widening Constraints
There is no existing bridge over Route 440 at the proposed location.
C. Conceptual Alternatives
Four alternatives were evaluated as part of the CD Study. The first alternative is an at-grade
crossing of Route 440 with no pedestrian bridge, and the three remaining alternatives are for
above grade pedestrian bridges connecting to the existing NJ Transit pedestrian facility. A
summary of each alternative analyzed is below.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
29 |
1. Alternative 1 – At-grade Crossing at Goldsborough Drive
This alternative will construct an
at-grade crosswalk across Route
440 at the signalized intersection
with Goldsborough Drive. The
proposed crosswalk will begin at
the existing concrete island
between Goldsborough Drive
and the exit lane from Route 440
NB, will extend across Route 440
and end at the western edge of
the Route 440 SB roadway. New
ADA compliant curb ramps, along
with pedestrian push buttons
and pedestrian signal heads will
be required at both ends of the
proposed crosswalk. A new 700
foot long 4-foot-wide concrete
sidewalk be constructed along
Route 440 SB to Prospect Avenue
to tie into an existing sidewalk.
The new sidewalk will allow for
connectivity to the NJ Transit 34th Street HBLR Station. The installation of new sidewalk will
require the placement of concrete curb and guide rail behind the new sidewalk along with
new end terminals. The new sidewalk will also conflict with an existing vacant overhead
cantilever sign structure that would require removal and possibly replacement.
Replacement or removal of the sign structure would need to be coordinated and approved
by the NJDOT. Refer to Figure 7 for an aerial view of the proposed at-grade crossing.
The introduction of new curb and sidewalk along the roadway will eliminate an existing
umbrella section which currently allows runoff to flow from the roadway across an existing
grass berm and into a swale along Route 440 SB. The improvements will therefore result in
a change to the existing flow pattern and require collecting this runoff with a series of new
inlets and pipes that will connect to an existing Stormwater Management (SWM) system on
Route 440. These alterations will result in the project being considered a “Major
Development” per N.J.A.C. 7:8 and will require stormwater quality mitigation. Due to
limited locations and opportunities within the vicinity of the project for construction of
green infrastructure Best Management Practices such as basins or swales, it is anticipated
that the use of a manufactured treatment device will be required to meet water quality
standards.
The addition of a bicycle lane or shared use path extending between Port Terminal Blvd.
and Goldsborough Drive shall be investigated during the PE phase of the project.
It should be noted that the intersection timing directive will need to be updated to account
for the proposed pedestrian crossing phase. In addition, conflicting traffic signs will require
removal and new traffic signs installed in support of the new pedestrian crosswalk, as well
as other ancillary improvements, such as topsoiling and seeding, etc.
Figure 7 - Plan View of Proposed Sidewalk Across Route 440
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
30 |
This alternative does not eliminate an at-grade crossing in which the potential remains for
vehicular/pedestrian collisions. In addition, the Route 440/Goldsborough Drive intersection
would be reduced to Level of Service (LOS) F due to the introduction of a pedestrian signal
phase.
2. Alternative 2 – Single Span Steel Truss Bridge
Figure 8 - Alternative 2 Elevation View Rendering
This alternative includes a single-span steel truss bridge which consists of a covered truss
with a 153’-10” span length and 12’-0” wide interior opening. The east landing will include
an end pier with stairs and elevator within the existing grass area (owned by the City of
Bayonne) between Route 440 and the CVS parking lot. A steel framed full enclosure is
proposed for the east landing, elevator and stairs. The bridge will connect to the existing
pier of the NJ Transit pedestrian bridge for the 34th Street HBLR Station. Refer to Figure 8
for an elevation view rendering of alternative 2.
Trusses are inherently fracture critical structures and the NJDOT requires that fracture
critical structures owned by the NJDOT need to receive approval from the Director of Bridge
Engineering and Infrastructure Management. Improvement of the redundancy of the truss
members should be evaluated in the Preliminary Engineering phase of the project.
The foundation of the east landing is recommended to be a deep foundation due to the
presence of soft organic and peat soils identified in our review of existing geologic maps
and historic borings. Drilled, augered, or driven pile alternatives can be considered to
support a single mat footing at the east tower. Ideally, the deep foundation elements can
be founded either within or bearing directly on bedrock, provided bedrock is confirmed by
a subsurface investigation program to be shallow to moderate depth.
This alternative will include the construction of a concrete sidewalk along Route 440 NB,
that will connect from the existing sidewalk on Goldsborough Drive to the existing sidewalk
at Port Terminal Boulevard. This sidewalk will connect to the proposed stairs and elevator
tower at the east landing. Creating a bicycle lane or shared use path extending between
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
31 |
Port Terminal Blvd. and Goldsborough Drive shall be investigated during the PE phase of
the project. Analysis of including a drop-off or kiss-and-ride area in the vicinity of the east
landing will be performed in the PE phase of the project.
This alternative includes a drainage disturbance of less than one acre and a net increase of
regulated motor vehicle/impervious pavement surface of less than one-quarter acre, which
would not be considered “Major Development”. The proposed stair and elevator tower will
impact existing drainage pipes and structures and will require rerouting and replacement
to accommodate the proposed improvements. Regrading of the disturbed areas would be
required to ensure positive drainage into the existing drainage structures.
This alternative provides a safe, grade separated crossing of Route 440. In addition, it will
have a moderate construction duration (one construction season), no impact to
intersection LOS, and will be a covered bridge which eliminates snow removal maintenance.
This alternative also provides architectural/aesthetic components which will enable it to be
a landmark structure for the City of Bayonne.
3. Alternative 3 – Two Span Sleek Concrete Bridge
Figure 9 - Alternative 3 Elevation View Rendering
This alternative includes a two-span sleek concrete bridge which consists of an uncovered
concrete bridge with a pier located within the roadway median. This bridge will have an
overall length of 155’-2” consisting of a 70’-4” span over Route 440 SB, a 54’-11” span over
Route 440 NB, and a 29’-11” span connecting to the stair and elevator. The interior opening
width will be 12’-0”. The superstructure will be a cast-in-place, post-tensioned, reinforced
concrete superstructure, founded on reinforced concrete piers and abutments. The east
landing will include an end pier with stairs and elevator within the existing grass area
(owned by the City of Bayonne) between Route 440 and the CVS parking lot. The bridge will
connect to the existing pier for the NJ Transit pedestrian bridge for the 34th Street HBLR
Station. Refer to Figure 9 for an elevation view rendering of alternative 3.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
32 |
The foundations for the pier and east tower are recommended to be a deep foundation due
to the presence of soft organic and peat soils identified in our review of existing geologic
maps and historic borings. Drilled, augered, or driven pile alternatives can be considered to
support a single mat footing at the east tower. Ideally, the deep foundation elements can
be founded either within or bearing directly on bedrock, provided bedrock is confirmed by
a subsurface investigation program to be shallow to moderate depth.
Alternative 3 will include the construction of a concrete sidewalk along Route 440 NB, that
will connect from the existing sidewalk on Goldsborough Drive to the existing sidewalk at
Port Terminal Boulevard. Creating a bicycle lane or shared use path extending between Port
Terminal Blvd. and Goldsborough Drive shall be investigated during the PE phase of the
project. This sidewalk will connect to the proposed stairs and elevator tower at the east
landing. In addition, the construction of a center pier for the bridge within the Route 440
median will require the installation of concrete median barrier and impact attenuator end
treatment to protect the new pier in accordance with NJDOT design standards. Analysis of
including a drop-off or kiss-and-ride area in the vicinity of the east landing will be performed
in the PE phase of the project.
This alternative includes a drainage disturbance of less than one acre and a net increase of
regulated motor vehicle/impervious pavement surface of less than one-quarter acre, which
would not be considered “Major Development”. The proposed stair and elevator tower
along Route 440 NB would impact existing drainage pipes and structures that will require
rerouting and replacement of existing drainage to accommodate the proposed
improvements. Regrading of the disturbed areas would be required to ensure positive
drainage into the existing drainage structures.
This alternative has the longest construction duration, requires a construction work zone in
the roadway median, requires two overnight closures of Route 440, and will require snow
removal maintenance.
4. Alternative 4 – Single Span Simple Girder Bridge
Figure 10 - Alternative 4 Elevation View Rendering
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
33 |
This alternative is a single-span simple girder bridge which consists of an uncovered bridge
with curved top chain link fencing. The span length is 132’-0” and 12’-0” wide interior
opening. The east landing will include an end pier with stairs and elevator within the existing
grass area (owned by the City of Bayonne) between Route 440 and the CVS parking lot. The
bridge will connect to the existing pier for the NJ Transit pedestrian bridge for the 34th Street
HBLR Station. The specific superstructure type for this alternative can be further explored
in subsequent phases of the project if this alternative is selected as the PPA. Potential
options could include multiple steel girders, multiple prestressed concrete box beams, or a
prefabricated bridge units (Inverset, NEXT Beam, etc.) This alternative calls for multiple
primary structural members so the structure is not considered fracture critical. Refer to
Figure 10 for an elevation view rendering of Alternative 4.
The foundations for the pier column and east tower are recommended to be a deep
foundation due to the presence of soft organic and peat soils identified in our review of
existing geologic maps and historic borings. Drilled, augered, or driven pile alternatives can
be considered to support a single mat footing at the east tower. Ideally, the deep
foundation elements can be founded either within or bearing directly on bedrock, provided
bedrock is confirmed by a subsurface investigation program to be shallow to moderate
depth.
Alternative 4 will include the construction of a concrete sidewalk along Route 440 NB, that
will connect from the existing sidewalk on Goldsborough Drive to the existing sidewalk at
Port Terminal Boulevard. Creating a bicycle lane or shared use path extending between Port
Terminal Blvd. and Goldsborough Drive shall be investigated during the PE phase of the
project. This sidewalk will connect to the proposed stairs and elevator tower at the east
landing. Analysis of including a drop-off or kiss-and-ride area in the vicinity of the east
landing will be performed in the PE phase of the project.
This alternative will require snow removal maintenance and lacks architectural/aesthetic
components.
D. Traffic Analysis
1. Existing Conditions Analysis
The existing conditions traffic analysis for the Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive intersection
was performed using turning movement counts collected in October 2022. This analysis
revealed that the intersection is operating at an overall LOS B with a delay of 19.9 seconds
per vehicle during the weekday AM peak hour and an overall LOS D with a delay of 36.5
seconds per vehicle during the weekday PM peak hour. The movement with the highest
average delay was the Route 440 SB left turn onto Goldsborough Drive EB which is operating
at LOS F with a delay of 139.9 seconds per vehicle. The existing signal operation directive
(No. 49-21) was provided by NJDOT and input for the existing condition study.
2. Growth Factor for Future Traffic Projection
The basis for the future traffic signal operation study is the need to provide a protected
crossing for pedestrians and bicyclists between the recently developed PABH on the east
side of Route 440 and the 34th Street HBLR Station on the west side of Route 440.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
34 |
Design year 2045 traffic projections were obtained using the average annual growth rate
(1.5%) from the current NJDOT Access Permit Annual Background Growth Rate Table for
Bergen County - Urban Principal Arterial. It should be noted that the City’s redevelopment
initiative known as “The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor” lies to the east of Goldsborough
Drive, which includes significant residential and commercial development. A portion of the
redevelopment has been completed to date and were therefore captured in the count data
and signal analysis. It should be noted that the design year analysis utilized an annual
growth rate factor as noted above and did not consider the remaining future
redevelopment build out.
3. 2045 Design Year Analysis
i.
No-build Condition
The year 2045 no-build condition analysis for the Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
intersection revealed that the intersection would operate at an overall LOS C with a
delay of 24.7 seconds per vehicle during the weekday AM peak hour and an overall LOS
D with a delay of 39.9 seconds per vehicle during the weekday PM peak hour. The
movement with the highest average delay was the Route 440 SB left turn onto
Goldsborough Drive EB which is operating at LOS F with a delay of 109.9 seconds per
vehicle. The existing traffic signal timings were optimized in Synchro, and were adjusted
accordingly.
ii. Alternative 1 Build Condition
The year 2045 Alternative 1 traffic analysis for Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
intersection which proposes to install a crosswalk at south side of intersection resulted
in the intersection operating at an overall LOS C with a delay of 32.4 seconds per vehicle
during the weekday AM peak hour and an overall LOS E with a delay of 57.1 seconds
per vehicle during the weekday PM peak hour. The movement with the highest average
delay would be the Route 440 SB left turn onto Goldsborough Drive EB which resulted
in LOS F with a delay of 104.6 seconds per vehicle. The existing traffic signal timings
were optimized in Synchro.
iii.
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 Build Condition
The condition analysis associated with the construction of an above-grade pedestrian
bridge would result in conditions similar to the no-build condition. The Route 440 and
Goldsborough Drive intersection would operate at an overall LOS C during the weekday
AM peak hour and an overall LOS D during the weekday PM peak hour. The Route 440
SB left turn onto Goldsborough Drive EB would still operate at a LOS F.
E. Hydrology & Hydraulics Analysis
1. Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis
Although the proposed project results in fill within the flood hazard area, the proposed loss
of floodplain storage associated with the pedestrian bridge stair and elevator tower is
exempt from flood storage displacement limits per N.J.A.C. 7:13-11.4(d)1 for activities
within a tidal flood hazard area. Therefore, no hydrologic and hydraulic analysis or flood
storage displacement calculations are required for the project.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
35 |
2. Stormwater Management
The proposed PPA is not anticipated to be considered a major development by the
Stormwater Management rules at N.J.A.C. 7:8 because it is not expected to result in:
-
The disturbance of one or more acres of land
-
The creation of one-quarter or more of “regulated impervious surface”
-
The creation of one-quarter acre or more of “regulated motor vehicle surface”
The existing roadway drainage system on Route 440 is not anticipated to be impacted by
the proposed improvements. An independent drainage system associated with the original
development of the MOTBY properties is located parallel to Route 440 is expected to be
impacted by the proposed stair and elevator tower on the east side of the roadway. This
system will require modifications to the system to reroute it around the proposed tower.
Minor surface grading will be required to ensure positive drainage is maintained to the new
inlets installed as a part of rerouting this drainage system. Accommodations for stormwater
runoff from downspouts and leader drains from the new pedestrian bridge and tower will
need to be resolved in future design phases.
F. Right of Way Impacts and Review
All work associated with Alternative 1 will occur within the existing state and/or City ROW. For
the bridge alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, and 4), all work on the east landing will occur within
the State and/or City ROW. However, the west end of the bridge will tie-in to the existing pier
for the 34th Street HBLR Station, within NJ Transit property. The permanent/temporary
easements and/or Right-Of-Entry agreements required to connect the proposed pedestrian
bridge to the existing NJ Transit 34th Street HBLR Station pedestrian bridge and to allow
temporary access for cranes to erect pre-fabricated bridge into place will be determined
through coordination with NJ Transit and Conrail during the Preliminary Engineering Phase.
Refer to Appendix M for the ROW and Access Impact Plan.
G. Utility Impacts
Alternative 1 will have the least impact on the existing utilities located at the project site.
However, the installation of the new traffic signal system will require extensive Subsurface
Utility Engineering (SUE) to accurately locate the underground utilities so that conflicts can be
avoided. The three bridge alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, and 4) will result in a direct conflict
with the aerial utilities (electric, telephone, and cable) located on poles along Route 440 NB.
The proposed bridge in each of these alternatives will have a direct conflict with the telephone
and cable utility and will violate the OSHA High Voltage Proximity Act requirements for
clearance to the electric line. Therefore, each bridge alternative proposes to relocate the
electric utility underground within the right lane of Route 440 NB. In addition, the aerial
telephone and cable utilities will be lowered on the existing poles so they will span under the
proposed pedestrian bridge. There are underground utilities within the project limits that will
need to be accurately located via SUE to ensure other utility conflicts are avoided. All utility
conflicts will be confirmed during the Preliminary Engineering (PE) phase.
The utilities within the project limits include the following:
-
Aerial Electric (JCP&L)
-
Aerial Telephone (Verizon)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
36 |
-
Aerial Cable (Altice USA/Cablevision)
-
Underground Gas Pipeline (Williams Transco)
-
Underground Gas Pipeline (IMTT)
-
Water (City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division)
-
Sanitary Sewer (City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division)
H. ITS Facilities
NJDOTs Mobility and Systems Engineering inventory of intelligent transportation system
devices database was checked and there are no existing ITS facilities within the project limits.
Future ITS accommodations are not anticipated but will be confirmed during the PE phase.
I. Complete Streets Policy
The NJDOT Complete Streets Policy was
established to create a comprehensive,
integrated, connected multi-modal network
by providing connections to bicycling and
walking
trip
generators
such
as
employment,
education,
residential,
recreational, and public facilities, as well as
retail and transit centers and to provide safe
and accessible accommodations for existing
and future pedestrian, bicycle and transit
facilities. This policy includes provisions to
provide ADA compliant facilities. The
Complete Streets Checklist has been
completed and is included in Appendix W.
All studied alternatives will be compliant
with the Complete Streets Policy as they will
move pedestrians and bicyclists between
the east side of Route 440 (where there is
retail and residential properties) and the
west side of Route 440 (where there are
residential and commercial properties as well as the 34th Street HBLR Station). Alternative 1 will
provide a pedestrian crossing at the Route 440/Goldsborough Drive intersection as well as
sidewalks along Route 440 SB. Bicyclists can use the wide 15’ shoulder on Route 440 SB and
then the turning lane at Prospect Avenue. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 all provide a pedestrian
bridge that will accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists since the proposed bridge is wide
enough to provide a shared use path for pedestrians and bicyclists. There is a proposed elevator
at the east landing and bicycle friendly runnels will be provided on the staircases.
J. Access Impacts and Review
None of the developed alternatives will have permanent impact on the existing access
points/driveways to the adjacent properties. Access to these properties will be maintained
during construction.
Figure 11 - Existing Asphalt Sidewalk Along Rt. 440 NB
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
37 |
K. Constructability and Staging Plans and Detour Plan
The constructability of each of the developed alternatives was analyzed along with their
construction staging requirements, contractor access, and impacts to vehicles and pedestrians.
1. Alternative 1
The improvements that are part of Alternative 1 will be constructed in one stage with the
construction sequence being as follows:
-
1 - Shifting the Route 440 SB lanes to the east, maintaining all lanes of traffic and the
exit to Prospect Avenue. A temporary construction barrier will separate the traffic
from the work zone. The work involves the demolition of the existing guide rail and
removal of the overhead sign structure along Route 440 SB and then the construction
of the proposed sidewalk, curbing, drainage, guide rail, and a drainage ditch.
-
2 - Construction of new signal system and installation of new crosswalk striping.
Work will be constructed utilizing temporary lane closures during off-peak hours in
accordance with the NJDOT Standard Traffic Control Details.
-
3 -Milling and paving of the Route 440 roadway within the limits of the temporary
lane shifts. Work will be performed utilizing temporary lane closures during off-peak
hours in accordance with the NJDOT Standard Traffic Control Details.
2. Alternative 2 and Alternative 4
The improvements that are part of Alternatives 2 and 4 are similar and will be constructed
in one stage with the construction sequence being as follows:
-
1 - Shifting the Route 440 NB lanes to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic. A
temporary construction barrier will separate the work zone. The work involves
relocating the aerial electric utility underground and lowering the telephone and
cable utilities on their existing utility poles along Route 440 NB. Once this is
completed, the east pier, stairs, elevator system, and sidewalk will be constructed.
During Stage 1, the Route 440 SB shoulder will also be closed with a temporary
construction barrier to allow for preparation work on the existing pier to receive the
proposed pedestrian bridge.
-
2 - Close Route 440 for one night on a weekend with the implementation of a detour.
The prefabricated pedestrian bridge will be erected into place.
-
3 -Milling and paving of the Route 440 roadway within the limits of the temporary
lane shifts. Work will be constructed utilizing temporary lane closures during off-peak
hours in accordance with the NJDOT Standard Traffic Control Details.
3. Alternative 3
The improvements that are part of Alternative 3 will be constructed in two stages with the
construction sequence being as follows:
Stage 1
-
1 - Shifting the Route 440 NB lanes to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic. A
temporary construction barrier will separate the work zone. The work involves
relocating the aerial electric utility underground and lowering the telephone and
cable utilities on their existing utility poles along Route 440 NB. Once this is
completed, the east pier, stairs, elevator system, and sidewalk will be constructed.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
38 |
The Route 440 SB shoulder will also be closed with a temporary construction barrier
to allow for preparation work for the existing pier to receive the proposed pedestrian
bridge.
Stage 2
-
1 - Shifting the Route 440 NB traffic to the east, maintaining all lanes of traffic. The
work involves removing the existing median barrier, constructing the proposed pier
in the median, and constructing new median barrier.
-
2 - Route 440 will be closed overnight on a weekend to construct the temporary
falsework for the proposed bridge. After the temporary falsework is constructed,
Route 440 will be reopened. Construction of the concrete formwork, reinforcement,
post-tensioning, pouring of concrete, curing of concrete, and removal of the concrete
formwork can be conducted from the temporary falsework. After the bridge is
constructed and cured, Route 440 will be closed overnight on a weekend to
deconstruct the temporary falsework and after the temporary falsework is removed,
Route 440 will be reopened. A detour of Route 440 will be in place during the
falsework construction and deconstruction.
-
3 - Milling and paving of the Route 440 roadway within the limits of the temporary
lane shifts. Work will be constructed utilizing temporary lane closures during off-
peak hours in accordance with the NJDOT Standard Traffic Control Details.
Refer to Appendix M for the Preliminary Construction Staging Plans for each alternative as well
as the Detour Plans.
L. Controlling Substandard Design Elements and Reasonable Assurance
Based on a review of available data, survey information, and as-built plans, there are no
Controlling Substandard Design Elements (CSDE) within the project corridor. Therefore,
receiving reasonable assurance of a design exception approval from NJDOT is not required. An
assessment of the Controlling Substandard Design Elements should be performed and
confirmed during the Preliminary Engineering Phase.
M. Construction Cost Estimate
Concept Development level construction cost estimates were prepared for each of the
developed alternatives, and they range from approximately $800,000 to approximately
$10,000,000.
The table below provides a summary of the anticipated costs (including utility relocations) for
each of the alternatives. The CD level construction cost estimates for each alternative are
provided in Appendix R.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
39 |
Table 4 - Concept Development Level Construction Cost Estimates
Component
Alt. 1
Alt. 2
Alt. 3
Alt. 4
Construction
$ 0.541 M
$ 6.902 M
$ 4.584 M
$ 3.314 M
Construction
Engineering
$ 0.168 M
$1.118 M
$ 0.930 M
$ 0.673 M
Contingencies
$ 0.027 M
$ 0.262 M
$ 0.188 M
$ 0.137 M
Utilities
$ 0.065 M
$ 1.800 M
$ 1.800 M
$ 1.800 M
Total Cost
$ 0.801 M
$ 10.082 M
$7.502 M
$ 5.924 M
N. Value Engineering Study and Report
Preparation of a value engineering study or report is not required since the estimated total cost
of the project is less than $40 million.
O. Life Cycle Cost Analysis
A life cycle cost analysis was not prepared for this project.
P. Alternatives Matrix
An alternatives matrix of the developed alternatives is available in Appendix S.
Q. Risk Analysis Summary
Risks associated with the developed alternatives were analyzed based on the probability of
impacts to the project cost and schedule. The potential need to relocate utilities was identified
as having a significant risk and are often the cause of delays and increased costs. The proposed
bridge alternatives may have a direct conflict with the overhead electric, cable, and telephone
utilities, requiring relocation. Extensive coordination with the utility companies is required to
develop a utility relocation scheme that will minimize impacts to cost and schedule.
For more information regarding project risks and mitigation methods, refer to the Risk Register
in Appendix T. The Risk Register is a living document and will be updated throughout the
project’s development during subsequent phases.
R. Discussion with Subject Matter Experts
Discussions were conducted with subject matter experts from the NJDOT during the Scope
Team/Core Group Meeting held on Thursday, May 4th, 2023 and the Constructability Risk
Analysis Workshop held on Thursday, June 29th, 2023. See Appendix Q for the minutes from
both meetings.
Coordination was also conducted with NJ Transit regarding the project and the proposed
connection to their existing pedestrian structure. Documentation of NJ Transit’s support for the
pedestrian bridge and their willingness to collaborate with the City of Bayonne can be found in
Appendix P.
S. Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA)
The selected PPA is Alternative 2 - Single-span Steel Truss Bridge due to the following reasons:
-
It meets the project Purpose and Need
-
Simpler traffic control during construction as work will be completed in one main stage.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
40 |
-
It has a moderate construction duration (one construction season) with only one
overnight closure of Route 440.
-
There is no impact to the Route 440/Goldsborough Drive intersection LOS.
-
Covered bridge eliminates snow removal maintenance.
-
Only minor drainage improvements rare required.
-
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components.
Conceptual plans for the PPA are available in Appendix M.
T. Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement
The Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement lists the proposed project’s deliverables and the
activities required to create those deliverables for the Preliminary Engineering phase. The scope
statement also provides a common understanding of the proposed project’s scope to
stakeholders, subject matter experts, and the designer and lists the proposed project’s major
objectives. It enables the project manager to perform more detailed planning, it helps guide the
design team’s work during execution, and provides the baseline for evaluating whether change
requests or additional work are contained within or outside the proposed project’s boundaries.
The Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement for this project can be found in Appendix AA.
VII. Concept Development Recommendation
A. Interagency Review Committee (IRC) Approval of Report
The Interagency Review Committee (IRC) consisting of individuals from the NJDOT Local Aid,
the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA), and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) held the IRC Meeting on February 15th, 2024. Subsequent to the
meeting, the IRC issued a letter approving the completion of the Concept Development phase.
A copy of the letter can be found in Appendix P.
Appendix A
Problem Statement Charter
(Not Applicable to this Project)
41 |
Appendix B
Bridge Re-evaluation Survey Report
(Not Applicable to this Project)
42 |
Appendix C
Bridge Scour Evaluation Report
(Not Applicable to this Project)
43 |
Appendix D
As-built Plans, ROW Maps, and
Jurisdictional Map
44 |
Appendix E
Tax Maps
114 |
Appendix F
Crash Data
119 |
Line
No.
Date
Time
Crash Occurred On
Distance
Unit
Dir.
Intersection
Light Condition (98)
Road Surface
Condition (102)
Environmental
Condition (103)
# of
vehicles in
crash (104)
Crash Type (105)
Apparent Contributing
Circumstances (118-
119)
Total
Killed
Total
Injured
1
8/7/2022
8:54 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 2
0
0
2
9/7/2022
5:52 AM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
W
Lefante Way
02 - Dawn
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
4, 25
0
1
3
7/25/2022
3:25 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
N
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
05 - Overcast
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25
0
0
4
7/16/2022
9:06 PM
E 32nd St.
5.0
Feet
W
440 SB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25
0
0
5
7/7/2022
12:10 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
0
6
8/18/2022
6:18 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
60.0
Feet
E
440
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 09, 25
0
0
7
5/22/2022
2:45 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
8
4/5/2022
6:47 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
03 - Dusk
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
1
9
4/1/2022
4:34 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 25
0
0
10
3/26/2022
5:55 PM
440 NB
10.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
08, 25
0
0
11
2/15/2022
11:12 AM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
08 - Backing
29, 25
0
0
12
2/10/2022
7:38 AM
440 NB
20.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
13
1/27/2022
-
Goldsborough Dr.
100.0
Feet
E
440 NB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
11 - Fixed Object
29
0
0
14
1/19/2022
1:01 PM
440 NB
75.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 25, 02 ,05
0
0
15
1/13/2022
1:50 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25, 25, 25
0
0
16
1/12/2022
5:00 PM
440
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
03 - Dusk
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
17
1/11/2022
5:53 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
30.0
Feet
E
440 NB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
00, 00
0
0
18
1/10/2022
6:33 PM
440 NB
20.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
05 - Dark (no street lights)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
1
19
12/14/2021
6:37 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
0
20
12/6/2021
2:54 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
150.0
Feet
E
440 NB
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
08, 01
0
0
21
12/4/2021
10:57 AM
Goldsborough Dr.
25.0
Feet
E
440 NB
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 02
0
0
22
11/25/2021
1:25 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25, 09, 09
0
0
23
11/20/2021
12:31 PM
440 SB
25.0
Feet
W
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
59, 25
0
1
24
11/17/2021
7:48 AM
440 NB
75.0
Feet
S
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25, 09, 09
0
0
25
11/16/2021
12:59 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
08, 05, 25, 25
0
0
26
11/13/2021
1:16 PM
440 NB
25.0
Feet
E
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
05 - Overcast
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25, 02, 09
0
0
27
11/13/2021
12:04 PM
440 NB
200.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
28
11/11/2021
5:37 PM
440 NB
200.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
29
11/4/2021
6:45 AM
440 NB
150.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
30
10/30/2021
5:15 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
30.0
Feet
E
440 NB
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 25
0
0
31
10/29/2021
4:58 PM
440 SB
400.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
60, 25
0
0
32
10/21/2021
4:36 PM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09, 02
0
1
33
9/23/2021
9:16 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 02, 08
0
0
34
8/23/2021
9:13 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
3
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 02, 25
0
0
35
8/20/2021
3:53 PM
Lefante Way
0.0
Feet
-
440
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
03, 01, 25
0
0
36
8/6/2021
6:52 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
2 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 00
0
0
37
8/5/2021
3:26 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
100.0
Feet
E
440 NB
3 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 02
0
0
38
7/30/2021
7:57 PM
440 NB
15.0
Feet
W
Lefante Way
4 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
10 - Overturned
29
0
1
39
7/28/2021
1:37 PM
440 NB
25.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
3
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
40
7/18/2021
9:31 PM
440 SB
25.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
0
41
7/13/2021
5:49 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
42
6/24/2021
9:06 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
3
03 - Right Angle
25, 03
0
1
43
6/2/2021
3:32 PM
440 SB
300.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
44
5/30/2021
8:49 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 29
0
0
45
5/30/2021
8:33 AM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
46
5/12/2021
4:58 PM
440
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
4
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
02, 04, 25
0
0
47
4/24/2021
3:31 AM
440
500.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
05 - Dark (no street lights)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
11, 31, 25
0
0
48
4/6/2021
6:06 PM
440SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
4
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
04, 25
0
0
49
3/22/2021
7:38 PM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
N
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
11 - Fixed Object
33
0
0
50
3/21/2021
5:13 PM
440 SB
100.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
05, 02
0
1
51
3/19/2021
3:12 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 01
0
0
52
3/17/2021
7:21 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
3
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25
0
0
53
3/14/2021
10:09 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
54
3/12/2021
2:32 PM
440 SB
10.0
Feet
S
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
9
0
0
55
2/18/2021
6:18 AM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
02 - Dawn
03 - Snowy
03 - Snow
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
2
0
0
56
2/13/2021
12:59 PM
440 SB
50.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
2
57
2/11/2021
1:11 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
500.0
Feet
E
440
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
12, 25
0
0
58
2/1/2021
8:20 AM
440 SB
150.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
03 - Snowy
03 - Snow
2
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
51, 51, 51, 51
0
0
59
1/28/2021
6:16 PM
Lefante Way
25.0
Feet
E
440
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
60
1/25/2021
5:15 PM
E 32nd St.
0.0
Feet
-
440 SB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
08, 25
0
0
Crash Records For Project Area (on Route 440 between E 32nd St/Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive) from 1/1/19 - 9/22/22
Line
No.
Date
Time
Crash Occurred On
Distance
Unit
Dir.
Intersection
Light Condition (98)
Road Surface
Condition (102)
Environmental
Condition (103)
# of
vehicles in
crash (104)
Crash Type (105)
Apparent Contributing
Circumstances (118-
119)
Total
Killed
Total
Injured
Crash Records For Project Area (on Route 440 between E 32nd St/Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive) from 1/1/19 - 9/22/22
61
1/23/2021
4:49 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
03 - Dusk
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
62
1/20/2021
5:38 PM
440 SB
150.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
3
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
63
1/19/2021
10:09 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
03 - Right Angle
02, 25
0
3
64
12/15/2020
9:12 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 05
0
0
65
11/27/2020
8:52 PM
Lefante Way
0.0
Feet
-
440 NB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
13 - Pedestrian
04, 85
0
1
66
11/5/2020
12:08 PM
440
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
05 - Opposite Direction (side swipe)
25, 25, 04, 04
0
1
67
10/25/2020
3:23 AM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
32, 25
0
0
68
10/19/2020
6:06 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
200.0
Feet
E
440 SB
04 - Dark (street lights off)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
69
10/12/2020
1:03 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
50.0
Feet
E
440 NB
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
9
0
0
70
10/1/2020
1:24 PM
440 NB
200.0
Feet
N
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
05, 25
0
0
71
9/14/2020
12:15 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
05, 25
0
2
72
9/2/2020
11:01 AM
440 SB
10.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 09, 25, 25
0
0
73
8/30/2020
9:21 PM
440 SB
50.0
Feet
S
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
1
74
8/28/2020
12:21 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
75
8/22/2020
4:49 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
76
8/20/2020
-
440 NB
0.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 02
0
0
77
6/27/2020
5:33 PM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 05
0
0
78
6/26/2020
12:44 PM
440 NB
25.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
1
79
6/4/2020
2:42 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
21
0
0
80
5/16/2020
11:43 AM
440 SB
10.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
21, 02, 25
0
0
81
3/29/2020
1:50 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
05 - Overcast
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 03
0
0
82
3/13/2020
10:42 PM
Lefante Way
0.0
Feet
-
440
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
02, 04, 25
0
1
83
3/12/2020
8:49 PM
440 SB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
1
11 - Fixed Object
51
0
0
84
2/24/2020
10:05 AM
Goldsborough Dr.
20.0
Feet
E
440
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
29, 29
0
0
85
2/18/2020
6:54 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
5
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
25, 25
0
2
86
2/7/2020
2:58 PM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
1
87
2/1/2020
8:56 PM
440 SB
300.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
00, 00, 25
0
2
88
1/30/2020
4:15 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
07 - Left Turn/U Turn
25, 08
0
0
89
1/27/2020
1:49 PM
440 SB
25.0
Feet
E
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
0
90
1/18/2020
1:32 PM
440 SB
20.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
05 - Slush
03 - Snow
2
11 - Fixed Object
51, 08, 02
0
0
91
1/5/2020
3:10 PM
Goldsborough Dr.
20.0
Feet
W
440 NB
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
0
92
12/19/2019
1:00 PM
440 SB
200.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 02, 25, 25
0
1
93
12/18/2019
9:02 PM
440 SB
30.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
04 - Icy
03 - Snow
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
51, 25
0
2
94
12/17/2019
7:06 PM
440 SB
75.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
05 - Dark (no street lights)
02 - Wet
07 - Blowing Snow
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
51, 25
0
0
95
12/14/2019
6:47 AM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
02 - Dawn
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
03 - Right Angle
25, 02
0
0
96
12/9/2019
9:01 AM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
03 - Right Angle
29, 29
0
0
97
12/5/2019
9:32 PM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
98
11/26/2019
6:21 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
0
99
11/23/2019
4:38 PM
440 NB
300.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 00
0
1
100
11/10/2019
6:00 PM
440 SB
40.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
05 - Dark (no street lights)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
101
11/10/2019
2:27 PM
440 NB
300.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
102
10/25/2019
9:44 PM
Lefante Way
40.0
Feet
E
440 NB
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
4
103
10/7/2019
11:11 PM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Lefante Way
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
03 - Right Angle
02, 02
0
0
104
10/6/2019
12:28 PM
440 SB
100.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
05 - Overcast
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
02, 25
0
0
105
9/22/2019
8:19 PM
440 SB
25.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25
0
1
106
9/18/2019
1:42 PM
440 SB
20.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
107
9/16/2019
10:04 AM
440 NB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
0
108
8/22/2019
8:51 AM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
9
0
0
109
8/16/2019
11:50 AM
Lefante Way
15.0
Feet
E
440 NB
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 09, 25, 25
0
2
110
8/5/2019
11:55 AM
440 SB
0.0
Feet
-
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
10 - Overturned
2
0
1
111
7/31/2019
3:02 PM
440 SB
10.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
51, 25
0
1
112
7/18/2019
11:13 PM
440 SB
15.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
05, 25
0
0
113
7/14/2019
2:49 PM
440 NB
50.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
114
6/20/2019
11:50 AM
E 32nd St.
0.0
Feet
-
440 NB
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
02, 25
0
0
115
6/15/2019
10:11 PM
440 SB
50.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
116
5/22/2019
3:34 PM
440 NB
45.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
0
117
5/22/2019
8:49 AM
440 NB
30.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
02, 25
0
0
118
4/25/2019
7:35 AM
440 NB
100.0
Feet
S
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
09, 25
0
0
119
4/12/2019
9:01 AM
440 SB
250.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
02, 25
0
0
120
4/11/2019
5:49 PM
440 SB
150.0
Feet
N
Lefante Way
03 - Dusk
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
Line
No.
Date
Time
Crash Occurred On
Distance
Unit
Dir.
Intersection
Light Condition (98)
Road Surface
Condition (102)
Environmental
Condition (103)
# of
vehicles in
crash (104)
Crash Type (105)
Apparent Contributing
Circumstances (118-
119)
Total
Killed
Total
Injured
Crash Records For Project Area (on Route 440 between E 32nd St/Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive) from 1/1/19 - 9/22/22
121
3/21/2019
7:04 PM
440 SB
10.0
Feet
N
E 32nd St.
06 - Dark (street lights on, continuous)
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
0
122
2/28/2019
7:41 AM
440 SB
125.0
Feet
S
E 32nd St.
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
01 - Clear
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 25
0
0
123
1/29/2019
1:32 PM
440 NB
350.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
01 - Daylight
01 - Dry
05 - Overcast
5
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 09
0
2
124
1/24/2019
7:20 AM
440 NB
80.0
Feet
S
Lefante Way
01 - Daylight
02 - Wet
02 - Rain
2
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
25, 02
0
1
125
1/14/2019
2:50 AM
440 NB
200.0
Feet
N
Goldsborough Dr
05 - Dark (no street lights)
01 - Dry
01 - Clear
1
11 - Fixed Object
21
0
1
#
%
#
%
73
58%
3
2%
21
17%
3
2%
15
12%
24
19%
5
4%
2
2%
1
1%
3
2%
0
0%
5
4%
1
1%
4
3%
1
1%
13
10%
0
0%
0
0%
2
2%
1
1%
5
4%
0
0%
0
0%
54
43%
1
1%
5
4%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
125
100%
5
4%
1
1%
1
1%
0
0%
125
100%
59 - Sunglare
60
85 - Pedestrian Factor (None)
Total
Crash Summary Tables
15 - Non-fixed Object
32 - Vehicle Brakes
16 - Railcar - vehicle
33 - Vehicle Steering
Total
51 - Road Surface Condition
12 - Animal
25 - None
13 - Pedestrian
29 - Other Drive/Pedalcyclist Action
14 - Pedalcyclist
31 - Vehicle Defective Lights
09 - Encroachment
11 - Improper Use/No Lights
10 - Overturned
12 - Wrong Way
11 - Fixed Object
21
06 - Struck Parked Vehicle
5 - Improper Lane Change
07 - Left Turn/U Turn
8 - Improper Turning
08 - Backing
9 - Following Too Closely
03 - Right Angle
2 - Driver Inattention
04 - Opposite Direction (Head on, angular)
3 - Failed to Obey Traffic Control Device
05 - Opposite Direction (side swipe)
4 - Failed to Yield ROW to Vehicle/Ped
Crash Type
Apparent Contributing Circumstances
01 - Same Direction (rear end)
0 - No information
02 - Same Direction (side swipe)
1 - Unsafe Speed
Appendix G
Traffic Counts
124 |
TMC Data
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 1
Turning Movement Data
Start Time
Goldsborough Dr
Rte 440
Rte 440
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Thru
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
6:30 AM
39
23
3
0
0
65
315
30
26
0
0
371
26
215
0
0
241
677
6:45 AM
42
19
13
0
0
74
325
30
28
0
0
383
20
264
0
0
284
741
Hourly Total
81
42
16
0
0
139
640
60
54
0
0
754
46
479
0
0
525
1418
7:00 AM
52
23
4
0
0
79
359
22
21
0
0
402
18
196
0
2
214
695
7:15 AM
55
34
2
0
0
91
452
41
18
0
0
511
15
217
1
0
233
835
7:30 AM
60
27
8
0
0
95
360
36
15
0
0
411
17
184
0
0
201
707
7:45 AM
58
23
3
0
0
84
400
53
12
0
0
465
24
217
0
0
241
790
Hourly Total
225
107
17
0
0
349
1571
152
66
0
0
1789
74
814
1
2
889
3027
8:00 AM
66
24
21
0
0
111
373
59
23
0
0
455
15
219
1
0
235
801
8:15 AM
116
22
7
0
0
145
325
75
16
0
0
416
15
207
0
0
222
783
8:30 AM
103
28
17
0
1
148
369
53
34
0
0
456
22
220
0
0
242
846
8:45 AM
86
27
16
0
0
129
348
49
18
0
0
415
24
228
0
0
252
796
Hourly Total
371
101
61
0
1
533
1415
236
91
0
0
1742
76
874
1
0
951
3226
9:00 AM
65
30
5
0
0
100
336
38
22
0
0
396
24
193
0
0
217
713
9:15 AM
75
30
9
0
1
114
319
40
32
0
0
391
24
180
1
0
205
710
9:30 AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*** BREAK ***
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hourly Total
140
60
14
0
1
214
655
78
54
0
0
787
48
373
1
0
422
1423
3:30 PM
141
34
23
0
1
198
257
91
29
0
0
377
53
316
0
0
369
944
3:45 PM
132
29
15
0
2
176
203
76
23
0
4
302
46
287
0
0
333
811
Hourly Total
273
63
38
0
3
374
460
167
52
0
4
679
99
603
0
0
702
1755
4:00 PM
130
33
10
0
1
173
225
89
46
0
1
360
49
298
0
0
347
880
4:15 PM
130
28
15
0
0
173
212
94
27
0
0
333
42
316
1
0
359
865
4:30 PM
137
31
13
0
0
181
250
62
60
0
0
372
32
334
0
0
366
919
4:45 PM
136
26
10
0
0
172
269
61
55
1
0
386
57
265
0
0
322
880
Hourly Total
533
118
48
0
1
699
956
306
188
1
1
1451
180
1213
1
0
1394
3544
5:00 PM
132
40
10
0
0
182
268
48
51
0
0
367
40
260
1
0
301
850
5:15 PM
119
36
12
0
1
167
302
49
47
0
0
398
57
336
0
0
393
958
5:30 PM
156
36
21
0
0
213
285
53
35
0
0
373
57
350
0
0
407
993
5:45 PM
117
33
12
0
0
162
261
80
17
0
0
358
68
439
0
0
507
1027
Hourly Total
524
145
55
0
1
724
1116
230
150
0
0
1496
222
1385
1
0
1608
3828
6:00 PM
151
37
19
0
1
207
245
71
23
0
2
339
54
367
1
0
422
968
6:15 PM
133
28
17
0
0
178
228
62
30
0
1
320
79
388
0
0
467
965
6:30 PM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
Grand Total
2431
701
285
0
8
3417
7286
1362
708
1
8
9357
878
6497
6
2
7381
20155
Approach %
71.1
20.5
8.3
0.0
-
-
77.9
14.6
7.6
0.0
-
-
11.9
88.0
0.1
-
-
-
Total %
12.1
3.5
1.4
0.0
-
17.0
36.1
6.8
3.5
0.0
-
46.4
4.4
32.2
0.0
-
36.6
-
Lights
2366
666
279
0
-
3311
6660
1342
694
1
-
8697
847
5831
4
-
6682
18690
% Lights
97.3
95.0
97.9
-
-
96.9
91.4
98.5
98.0
100.0
-
92.9
96.5
89.7
66.7
-
90.5
92.7
Buses
25
4
0
0
-
29
47
4
2
0
-
53
8
45
0
-
53
135
% Buses
1.0
0.6
0.0
-
-
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.0
-
0.6
0.9
0.7
0.0
-
0.7
0.7
Trucks
40
31
6
0
-
77
579
16
12
0
-
607
23
621
2
-
646
1330
% Trucks
1.6
4.4
2.1
-
-
2.3
7.9
1.2
1.7
0.0
-
6.5
2.6
9.6
33.3
-
8.8
6.6
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
12.5
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
7
-
-
-
-
-
8
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
% Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
87.5
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 2
10/06/2022 6:30 AM
Ending At
10/06/2022 6:45 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
7609
6682
14291
51
53
104
618
646
1264
0
0
0
0
0
0
8278
7381
15659
5831
847
4
0
45
8
0
0
621
23
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6497
878
6
2
T
L
U
P
2948
0
0
51
14
2883
Out
3417
0
0
77
29
3311
In
6365
0
0
128
43
6194
Total
Goldsborough Dr [WB]
R
986
0
0
37
4
945
L
2431
0
0
40
25
2366
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
8
7
1
0
0
0
8198
8697
16895
70
53
123
661
607
1268
0
0
0
0
0
0
8929
9357
18286
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
T
R
P
1
6660
2036
0
0
47
6
0
0
579
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
1
7286
2070
8
Turning Movement Data Plot
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 3
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (8:00 AM)
Start Time
Goldsborough Dr
Rte 440
Rte 440
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Thru
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
8:00 AM
66
24
21
0
0
111
373
59
23
0
0
455
15
219
1
0
235
801
8:15 AM
116
22
7
0
0
145
325
75
16
0
0
416
15
207
0
0
222
783
8:30 AM
103
28
17
0
1
148
369
53
34
0
0
456
22
220
0
0
242
846
8:45 AM
86
27
16
0
0
129
348
49
18
0
0
415
24
228
0
0
252
796
Total
371
101
61
0
1
533
1415
236
91
0
0
1742
76
874
1
0
951
3226
Approach %
69.6
18.9
11.4
0.0
-
-
81.2
13.5
5.2
0.0
-
-
8.0
91.9
0.1
-
-
-
Total %
11.5
3.1
1.9
0.0
-
16.5
43.9
7.3
2.8
0.0
-
54.0
2.4
27.1
0.0
-
29.5
-
PHF
0.800
0.902
0.726
0.000
-
0.900
0.948
0.787
0.669
0.000
-
0.955
0.792
0.958
0.250
-
0.943
0.953
Lights
358
94
57
0
-
509
1303
233
89
0
-
1625
70
747
0
-
817
2951
% Lights
96.5
93.1
93.4
-
-
95.5
92.1
98.7
97.8
-
-
93.3
92.1
85.5
0.0
-
85.9
91.5
Buses
4
0
0
0
-
4
7
1
2
0
-
10
1
13
0
-
14
28
% Buses
1.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.8
0.5
0.4
2.2
-
-
0.6
1.3
1.5
0.0
-
1.5
0.9
Trucks
9
7
4
0
-
20
105
2
0
0
-
107
5
114
1
-
120
247
% Trucks
2.4
6.9
6.6
-
-
3.8
7.4
0.8
0.0
-
-
6.1
6.6
13.0
100.0
-
12.6
7.7
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 4
Peak Hour Data
10/06/2022 8:00 AM
Ending At
10/06/2022 9:00 AM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1454
817
2271
7
14
21
117
120
237
0
0
0
0
0
0
1578
951
2529
747
70
0
0
13
1
0
0
114
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
874
76
1
0
T
L
U
P
403
0
0
7
4
392
Out
533
0
0
20
4
509
In
936
0
0
27
8
901
Total
Goldsborough Dr [WB]
R
162
0
0
11
0
151
L
371
0
0
9
4
358
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
1
1
0
0
0
0
1105
1625
2730
17
10
27
123
107
230
0
0
0
0
0
0
1245
1742
2987
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
T
R
P
0
1303
322
0
0
7
3
0
0
105
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1415
327
0
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (8:00 AM)
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 5
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (5:30 PM)
Start Time
Goldsborough Dr
Rte 440
Rte 440
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Thru
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
5:30 PM
156
36
21
0
0
213
285
53
35
0
0
373
57
350
0
0
407
993
5:45 PM
117
33
12
0
0
162
261
80
17
0
0
358
68
439
0
0
507
1027
6:00 PM
151
37
19
0
1
207
245
71
23
0
2
339
54
367
1
0
422
968
6:15 PM
133
28
17
0
0
178
228
62
30
0
1
320
79
388
0
0
467
965
Total
557
134
69
0
1
760
1019
266
105
0
3
1390
258
1544
1
0
1803
3953
Approach %
73.3
17.6
9.1
0.0
-
-
73.3
19.1
7.6
0.0
-
-
14.3
85.6
0.1
-
-
-
Total %
14.1
3.4
1.7
0.0
-
19.2
25.8
6.7
2.7
0.0
-
35.2
6.5
39.1
0.0
-
45.6
-
PHF
0.893
0.905
0.821
0.000
-
0.892
0.894
0.831
0.750
0.000
-
0.932
0.816
0.879
0.250
-
0.889
0.962
Lights
550
129
69
0
-
748
958
265
105
0
-
1328
255
1449
1
-
1705
3781
% Lights
98.7
96.3
100.0
-
-
98.4
94.0
99.6
100.0
-
-
95.5
98.8
93.8
100.0
-
94.6
95.6
Buses
3
2
0
0
-
5
11
1
0
0
-
12
1
2
0
-
3
20
% Buses
0.5
1.5
0.0
-
-
0.7
1.1
0.4
0.0
-
-
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.0
-
0.2
0.5
Trucks
4
3
0
0
-
7
50
0
0
0
-
50
2
93
0
-
95
152
% Trucks
0.7
2.2
0.0
-
-
0.9
4.9
0.0
0.0
-
-
3.6
0.8
6.0
0.0
-
5.3
3.8
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 6
Peak Hour Data
10/06/2022 5:30 PM
Ending At
10/06/2022 6:30 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1157
1705
2862
13
3
16
53
95
148
0
0
0
0
0
0
1223
1803
3026
1449
255
1
0
2
1
0
0
93
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1544
258
1
0
T
L
U
P
629
0
0
2
2
625
Out
760
0
0
7
5
748
In
1389
0
0
9
7
1373
Total
Goldsborough Dr [WB]
R
203
0
0
3
2
198
L
557
0
0
4
3
550
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
1
1
0
0
0
0
1999
1328
3327
5
12
17
97
50
147
0
0
0
0
0
0
2101
1390
3491
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
T
R
P
0
958
370
0
0
11
1
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1019
371
3
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (5:30 PM)
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 1
Turning Movement Data
Start Time
32nd St
Lafante Way
Rte 440
Rte 440
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
6:30 AM
26
29
11
0
0
66
2
7
13
0
3
22
0
316
14
0
0
330
0
237
0
1
9
238
656
6:45 AM
26
35
14
0
1
75
6
5
26
0
2
37
0
325
14
0
0
339
0
267
2
0
16
269
720
Hourly Total
52
64
25
0
1
141
8
12
39
0
5
59
0
641
28
0
0
669
0
504
2
1
25
507
1376
7:00 AM
20
34
9
0
0
63
5
5
18
0
1
28
0
381
24
0
0
405
0
223
2
0
4
225
721
7:15 AM
31
33
10
0
0
74
9
5
28
0
1
42
0
470
20
0
0
490
0
228
1
0
2
229
835
7:30 AM
36
31
15
0
0
82
10
14
17
0
2
41
0
323
19
0
0
342
0
192
1
0
15
193
658
7:45 AM
46
32
12
0
1
90
7
12
19
0
1
38
0
342
20
0
0
362
0
208
2
0
12
210
700
Hourly Total
133
130
46
0
1
309
31
36
82
0
5
149
0
1516
83
0
0
1599
0
851
6
0
33
857
2914
8:00 AM
30
36
14
0
2
80
11
13
24
0
0
48
0
373
27
0
7
400
0
206
1
0
3
207
735
8:15 AM
28
43
22
0
0
93
12
15
21
0
1
48
0
355
19
0
0
374
0
221
3
0
7
224
739
8:30 AM
37
54
20
0
1
111
9
15
24
0
1
48
0
477
39
0
0
516
0
237
7
0
7
244
919
8:45 AM
39
55
22
0
0
116
14
25
15
0
2
54
0
422
27
1
0
450
0
231
8
0
13
239
859
Hourly Total
134
188
78
0
3
400
46
68
84
0
4
198
0
1627
112
1
7
1740
0
895
19
0
30
914
3252
9:00 AM
18
36
20
0
1
74
18
20
23
0
1
61
0
433
24
0
0
457
0
205
6
0
16
211
803
9:15 AM
28
49
15
0
1
92
16
11
23
1
1
51
0
356
37
0
0
393
0
204
2
0
5
206
742
9:30 AM
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
*** BREAK ***
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hourly Total
46
86
35
0
2
167
34
31
46
1
2
112
0
789
61
0
0
850
0
409
8
0
21
417
1546
3:30 PM
25
63
27
0
0
115
33
22
49
0
2
104
0
298
33
0
0
331
0
353
3
0
21
356
906
3:45 PM
15
75
20
0
0
110
20
29
36
0
0
85
0
234
40
0
0
274
0
350
4
0
17
354
823
Hourly Total
40
138
47
0
0
225
53
51
85
0
2
189
0
532
73
0
0
605
0
703
7
0
38
710
1729
4:00 PM
19
48
21
0
1
88
37
27
54
0
3
118
0
307
36
0
0
343
0
341
5
0
18
346
895
4:15 PM
36
62
25
0
0
123
24
32
61
0
1
117
0
267
37
0
0
304
0
343
1
0
21
344
888
4:30 PM
24
61
27
0
0
112
30
31
53
0
3
114
0
270
29
0
0
299
0
376
5
0
16
381
906
4:45 PM
25
66
28
0
2
119
36
24
44
0
0
104
0
308
33
0
1
341
0
294
7
1
15
302
866
Hourly Total
104
237
101
0
3
442
127
114
212
0
7
453
0
1152
135
0
1
1287
0
1354
18
1
70
1373
3555
5:00 PM
22
50
32
0
0
104
30
31
44
0
5
105
0
319
46
0
0
365
0
270
9
0
28
279
853
5:15 PM
29
65
22
0
1
116
23
42
48
0
0
113
0
316
52
0
0
368
0
362
5
0
16
367
964
5:30 PM
31
57
33
0
0
121
37
29
61
0
0
127
1
288
43
0
0
332
0
417
7
0
24
424
1004
5:45 PM
32
61
32
0
0
125
22
25
56
0
2
103
0
286
37
0
0
323
0
402
5
0
10
407
958
Hourly Total
114
233
119
0
1
466
112
127
209
0
7
448
1
1209
178
0
0
1388
0
1451
26
0
78
1477
3779
6:00 PM
26
88
20
0
0
134
35
33
37
0
3
105
0
325
46
0
0
371
0
404
11
0
18
415
1025
6:15 PM
29
69
26
0
0
124
31
34
56
0
0
121
0
308
47
0
0
355
0
395
9
0
13
404
1004
6:30 PM
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
Grand Total
678
1233
497
0
11
2408
478
506
850
1
35
1835
1
8099
763
1
8
8864
0
6967
106
2
326
7075
20182
Approach %
28.2
51.2
20.6
0.0
-
-
26.0
27.6
46.3
0.1
-
-
0.0
91.4
8.6
0.0
-
-
0.0
98.5
1.5
0.0
-
-
-
Total %
3.4
6.1
2.5
0.0
-
11.9
2.4
2.5
4.2
0.0
-
9.1
0.0
40.1
3.8
0.0
-
43.9
0.0
34.5
0.5
0.0
-
35.1
-
Lights
662
1207
488
0
-
2357
468
501
798
1
-
1768
1
7460
747
1
-
8209
0
6303
103
2
-
6408
18742
% Lights
97.6
97.9
98.2
-
-
97.9
97.9
99.0
93.9
100.0
-
96.3
100.0
92.1
97.9
100.0
-
92.6
-
90.5
97.2
100.0
-
90.6
92.9
Buses
1
5
2
0
-
8
1
1
2
0
-
4
0
61
2
0
-
63
0
60
0
0
-
60
135
% Buses
0.1
0.4
0.4
-
-
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
-
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.3
0.0
-
0.7
-
0.9
0.0
0.0
-
0.8
0.7
Trucks
15
21
7
0
-
43
9
4
50
0
-
63
0
578
14
0
-
592
0
604
3
0
-
607
1305
% Trucks
2.2
1.7
1.4
-
-
1.8
1.9
0.8
5.9
0.0
-
3.4
0.0
7.1
1.8
0.0
-
6.7
-
8.7
2.8
0.0
-
8.6
6.5
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
39
-
-
% Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
9.1
-
-
-
-
-
2.9
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
12.0
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
10
-
-
-
-
-
34
-
-
-
-
-
8
-
-
-
-
-
287
-
-
%
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
90.9
-
-
-
-
-
97.1
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
88.0
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 2
10/06/2022 6:30 AM
Ending At
10/06/2022 6:45 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
8922
6408
15330
64
60
124
643
607
1250
0
0
0
0
0
0
9629
7075
16704
103
6303
0
2
0
0
60
0
0
0
3
604
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
287
106
6967
0
2
326
R
T
L
U
P
1997
0
0
35
7
1955
Out
1835
0
0
63
4
1768
In
3832
0
0
98
11
3723
Total
Lafante Way [WB]
R
850
0
0
50
2
798
T
506
0
0
4
1
501
L
478
0
0
9
1
468
U
1
0
0
0
0
1
P
35
34
1
0
0
0
7260
8209
15469
63
63
126
620
592
1212
0
0
0
0
0
0
7943
8864
16807
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
L
T
R
P
1
1
7460
747
0
0
0
61
2
0
0
0
578
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
1
1
8099
763
8
32nd St [EB]
Total
2962
9
50
0
0
3021
In
2357
8
43
0
0
2408
Out
605
1
7
0
0
613
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
662
1
15
0
0
678
L
1207
5
21
0
0
1233
T
488
2
7
0
0
497
R
0
0
0
1
10
11
P
Turning Movement Data Plot
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 3
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (8:30 AM)
Start Time
32nd St
Lafante Way
Rte 440
Rte 440
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
8:30 AM
37
54
20
0
1
111
9
15
24
0
1
48
0
477
39
0
0
516
0
237
7
0
7
244
919
8:45 AM
39
55
22
0
0
116
14
25
15
0
2
54
0
422
27
1
0
450
0
231
8
0
13
239
859
9:00 AM
18
36
20
0
1
74
18
20
23
0
1
61
0
433
24
0
0
457
0
205
6
0
16
211
803
9:15 AM
28
49
15
0
1
92
16
11
23
1
1
51
0
356
37
0
0
393
0
204
2
0
5
206
742
Total
122
194
77
0
3
393
57
71
85
1
5
214
0
1688
127
1
0
1816
0
877
23
0
41
900
3323
Approach %
31.0
49.4
19.6
0.0
-
-
26.6
33.2
39.7
0.5
-
-
0.0
93.0
7.0
0.1
-
-
0.0
97.4
2.6
0.0
-
-
-
Total %
3.7
5.8
2.3
0.0
-
11.8
1.7
2.1
2.6
0.0
-
6.4
0.0
50.8
3.8
0.0
-
54.6
0.0
26.4
0.7
0.0
-
27.1
-
PHF
0.782 0.882 0.875 0.000
-
0.847 0.792 0.710 0.885 0.250
-
0.877 0.000 0.885 0.814 0.250
-
0.880 0.000 0.925 0.719 0.000
-
0.922 0.904
Lights
120
191
72
0
-
383
55
70
77
1
-
203
0
1537
124
1
-
1662
0
752
23
0
-
775
3023
% Lights
98.4
98.5
93.5
-
-
97.5
96.5
98.6
90.6
100.0
-
94.9
-
91.1
97.6
100.0
-
91.5
-
85.7
100.0
-
-
86.1
91.0
Buses
0
2
0
0
-
2
0
0
1
0
-
1
0
9
1
0
-
10
0
15
0
0
-
15
28
% Buses
0.0
1.0
0.0
-
-
0.5
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.0
-
0.5
-
0.5
0.8
0.0
-
0.6
-
1.7
0.0
-
-
1.7
0.8
Trucks
2
1
5
0
-
8
2
1
7
0
-
10
0
142
2
0
-
144
0
110
0
0
-
110
272
% Trucks
1.6
0.5
6.5
-
-
2.0
3.5
1.4
8.2
0.0
-
4.7
-
8.4
1.6
0.0
-
7.9
-
12.5
0.0
-
-
12.2
8.2
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
% Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
20.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.4
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
-
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
40
-
-
%
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
80.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
97.6
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 4
Peak Hour Data
10/06/2022 8:30 AM
Ending At
10/06/2022 9:30 AM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1734
775
2509
10
15
25
151
110
261
0
0
0
0
0
0
1895
900
2795
23
752
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
110
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
40
23
877
0
0
41
R
T
L
U
P
322
0
0
3
3
316
Out
214
0
0
10
1
203
In
536
0
0
13
4
519
Total
Lafante Way [WB]
R
85
0
0
7
1
77
T
71
0
0
1
0
70
L
57
0
0
2
0
55
U
1
0
0
0
0
1
P
5
4
1
0
0
0
880
1662
2542
15
10
25
117
144
261
0
0
0
0
0
0
1012
1816
2828
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
L
T
R
P
1
0
1537
124
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
142
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1688
127
0
32nd St [EB]
Total
476
2
9
0
0
487
In
383
2
8
0
0
393
Out
93
0
1
0
0
94
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
120
0
2
0
0
122
L
191
2
1
0
0
194
T
72
0
5
0
0
77
R
0
0
0
0
3
3
P
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (8:30 AM)
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 5
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (5:30 PM)
Start Time
32nd St
Lafante Way
Rte 440
Rte 440
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
Right
U-
Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
5:30 PM
31
57
33
0
0
121
37
29
61
0
0
127
1
288
43
0
0
332
0
417
7
0
24
424
1004
5:45 PM
32
61
32
0
0
125
22
25
56
0
2
103
0
286
37
0
0
323
0
402
5
0
10
407
958
6:00 PM
26
88
20
0
0
134
35
33
37
0
3
105
0
325
46
0
0
371
0
404
11
0
18
415
1025
6:15 PM
29
69
26
0
0
124
31
34
56
0
0
121
0
308
47
0
0
355
0
395
9
0
13
404
1004
Total
118
275
111
0
0
504
125
121
210
0
5
456
1
1207
173
0
0
1381
0
1618
32
0
65
1650
3991
Approach %
23.4
54.6
22.0
0.0
-
-
27.4
26.5
46.1
0.0
-
-
0.1
87.4
12.5
0.0
-
-
0.0
98.1
1.9
0.0
-
-
-
Total %
3.0
6.9
2.8
0.0
-
12.6
3.1
3.0
5.3
0.0
-
11.4
0.0
30.2
4.3
0.0
-
34.6
0.0
40.5
0.8
0.0
-
41.3
-
PHF
0.922 0.781 0.841 0.000
-
0.940 0.845 0.890 0.861 0.000
-
0.898 0.250 0.928 0.920 0.000
-
0.931 0.000 0.970 0.727 0.000
-
0.973 0.973
Lights
117
272
111
0
-
500
122
121
201
0
-
444
1
1150
173
0
-
1324
0
1523
31
0
-
1554
3822
% Lights
99.2
98.9
100.0
-
-
99.2
97.6
100.0
95.7
-
-
97.4
100.0
95.3
100.0
-
-
95.9
-
94.1
96.9
-
-
94.2
95.8
Buses
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
12
0
0
-
12
0
5
0
0
-
5
17
% Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
-
-
0.9
-
0.3
0.0
-
-
0.3
0.4
Trucks
1
3
0
0
-
4
3
0
9
0
-
12
0
45
0
0
-
45
0
90
1
0
-
91
152
% Trucks
0.8
1.1
0.0
-
-
0.8
2.4
0.0
4.3
-
-
2.6
0.0
3.7
0.0
-
-
3.3
-
5.6
3.1
-
-
5.5
3.8
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
% Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7.7
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
60
-
-
%
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
92.3
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Thursday, October 6, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/6)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/06/2022
Page No: 6
Peak Hour Data
10/06/2022 5:30 PM
Ending At
10/06/2022 6:30 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1468
1554
3022
12
5
17
55
91
146
0
0
0
0
0
0
1535
1650
3185
31
1523
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
60
32
1618
0
0
65
R
T
L
U
P
448
0
0
3
0
445
Out
456
0
0
12
0
444
In
904
0
0
15
0
889
Total
Lafante Way [WB]
R
210
0
0
9
0
201
T
121
0
0
0
0
121
L
125
0
0
3
0
122
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
5
5
0
0
0
0
1756
1324
3080
5
12
17
93
45
138
0
0
0
0
0
0
1854
1381
3235
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
L
T
R
P
0
1
1150
173
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
45
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1207
173
0
32nd St [EB]
Total
653
0
5
0
0
658
In
500
0
4
0
0
504
Out
153
0
1
0
0
154
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
117
0
1
0
0
118
L
272
0
3
0
0
275
T
111
0
0
0
0
111
R
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (5:30 PM)
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 1
Turning Movement Data
Start Time
Goldsborough Dr
Rte 440
Rte 440
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Thru
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
11:00 AM
118
53
28
0
3
199
222
59
73
0
0
354
80
263
0
0
343
896
11:15 AM
132
33
28
0
2
193
279
76
53
0
0
408
80
248
0
0
328
929
11:30 AM
144
48
29
0
0
221
307
55
59
0
0
421
79
270
0
0
349
991
11:45 AM
134
46
22
0
0
202
261
52
74
0
0
387
83
279
0
0
362
951
Hourly Total
528
180
107
0
5
815
1069
242
259
0
0
1570
322
1060
0
0
1382
3767
12:00 PM
144
56
29
0
2
229
311
78
43
0
1
432
82
272
0
1
354
1015
12:15 PM
157
47
22
0
0
226
285
68
59
0
0
412
90
292
0
0
382
1020
12:30 PM
149
49
24
0
1
222
307
78
68
0
0
453
71
265
0
0
336
1011
12:45 PM
173
71
24
0
0
268
269
62
52
0
0
383
90
274
2
0
366
1017
Hourly Total
623
223
99
0
3
945
1172
286
222
0
1
1680
333
1103
2
1
1438
4063
1:00 PM
139
54
20
0
1
213
284
64
51
0
1
399
68
306
0
0
374
986
1:15 PM
149
63
18
0
2
230
269
63
56
0
0
388
65
269
0
1
334
952
1:30 PM
155
53
23
0
0
231
282
66
49
0
0
397
71
270
1
0
342
970
1:45 PM
129
71
26
0
2
226
315
69
37
0
0
421
65
301
0
0
366
1013
Hourly Total
572
241
87
0
5
900
1150
262
193
0
1
1605
269
1146
1
1
1416
3921
2:00 PM
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
Grand Total
1723
644
293
0
13
2660
3393
790
674
0
2
4857
924
3309
3
2
4236
11753
Approach %
64.8
24.2
11.0
0.0
-
-
69.9
16.3
13.9
0.0
-
-
21.8
78.1
0.1
-
-
-
Total %
14.7
5.5
2.5
0.0
-
22.6
28.9
6.7
5.7
0.0
-
41.3
7.9
28.2
0.0
-
36.0
-
Lights
1713
637
290
0
-
2640
3294
784
669
0
-
4747
916
3232
3
-
4151
11538
% Lights
99.4
98.9
99.0
-
-
99.2
97.1
99.2
99.3
-
-
97.7
99.1
97.7
100.0
-
98.0
98.2
Buses
1
2
2
0
-
5
5
0
1
0
-
6
0
6
0
-
6
17
% Buses
0.1
0.3
0.7
-
-
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
-
-
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
-
0.1
0.1
Trucks
9
5
1
0
-
15
94
6
4
0
-
104
8
71
0
-
79
198
% Trucks
0.5
0.8
0.3
-
-
0.6
2.8
0.8
0.6
-
-
2.1
0.9
2.1
0.0
-
1.9
1.7
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
7.7
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
12
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
% Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
92.3
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 2
10/08/2022 11:00 AM
Ending At
10/08/2022 2:15 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
4224
4151
8375
9
6
15
100
79
179
0
0
0
0
0
0
4333
4236
8569
3232
916
3
0
6
0
0
0
71
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3309
924
3
2
T
L
U
P
2388
0
0
18
1
2369
Out
2660
0
0
15
5
2640
In
5048
0
0
33
6
5009
Total
Goldsborough Dr [WB]
R
937
0
0
6
4
927
L
1723
0
0
9
1
1713
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
13
12
1
0
0
0
4945
4747
9692
7
6
13
80
104
184
0
0
0
0
0
0
5032
4857
9889
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
T
R
P
0
3294
1453
0
0
5
1
0
0
94
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3393
1464
2
Turning Movement Data Plot
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 3
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (12:00 PM)
Start Time
Goldsborough Dr
Rte 440
Rte 440
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Thru
Right
Right
on Red
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Left
Thru
U-Turn
Peds
App.
Total
Int.
Total
12:00 PM
144
56
29
0
2
229
311
78
43
0
1
432
82
272
0
1
354
1015
12:15 PM
157
47
22
0
0
226
285
68
59
0
0
412
90
292
0
0
382
1020
12:30 PM
149
49
24
0
1
222
307
78
68
0
0
453
71
265
0
0
336
1011
12:45 PM
173
71
24
0
0
268
269
62
52
0
0
383
90
274
2
0
366
1017
Total
623
223
99
0
3
945
1172
286
222
0
1
1680
333
1103
2
1
1438
4063
Approach %
65.9
23.6
10.5
0.0
-
-
69.8
17.0
13.2
0.0
-
-
23.2
76.7
0.1
-
-
-
Total %
15.3
5.5
2.4
0.0
-
23.3
28.8
7.0
5.5
0.0
-
41.3
8.2
27.1
0.0
-
35.4
-
PHF
0.900
0.785
0.853
0.000
-
0.882
0.942
0.917
0.816
0.000
-
0.927
0.925
0.944
0.250
-
0.941
0.996
Lights
622
221
98
0
-
941
1142
283
221
0
-
1646
330
1064
2
-
1396
3983
% Lights
99.8
99.1
99.0
-
-
99.6
97.4
99.0
99.5
-
-
98.0
99.1
96.5
100.0
-
97.1
98.0
Buses
0
1
1
0
-
2
1
0
0
0
-
1
0
4
0
-
4
7
% Buses
0.0
0.4
1.0
-
-
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.0
-
0.3
0.2
Trucks
1
1
0
0
-
2
29
3
1
0
-
33
3
35
0
-
38
73
% Trucks
0.2
0.4
0.0
-
-
0.2
2.5
1.0
0.5
-
-
2.0
0.9
3.2
0.0
-
2.6
1.8
Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
% Bicycles on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
% Pedestrians
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & Goldsborough Dr
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.672438, -
74.106256
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 &
Goldsborough Dr (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 4
Peak Hour Data
10/08/2022 12:00 PM
Ending At
10/08/2022 1:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1463
1396
2859
3
4
7
30
38
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
1496
1438
2934
1064
330
2
0
4
0
0
0
35
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1103
333
2
1
T
L
U
P
841
0
0
7
0
834
Out
945
0
0
2
2
941
In
1786
0
0
9
2
1775
Total
Goldsborough Dr [WB]
R
322
0
0
1
2
319
L
623
0
0
1
0
622
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
3
3
0
0
0
0
1686
1646
3332
4
1
5
36
33
69
0
0
0
0
0
0
1726
1680
3406
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
T
R
P
0
1142
504
0
0
1
0
0
0
29
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1172
508
1
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (12:00 PM)
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 1
Turning Movement Data
Start
Time
32nd St
Lafante Way
Rte 440
Rte 440
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Int.
Tota
l
11:00 AM
44
79
18
0
0
0
141
31
25
53
1
0
4
110
0
281
36
12
0
2
329
0
272
8
0
0
6
280
860
11:15 AM
74
48
18
0
0
0
140
41
25
58
6
0
1
130
0
308
41
24
0
0
373
0
302
9
2
0
3
313
956
11:30 AM
53
71
15
0
0
0
139
24
28
59
4
0
0
115
0
318
39
24
0
0
381
0
318
8
1
0
10
327
962
11:45 AM
66
65
18
0
0
1
149
31
29
55
2
0
0
117
0
285
32
27
0
0
344
0
308
8
0
0
12
316
926
Hourly Total
237
263
69
0
0
1
569
127
107
225
13
0
5
472
0
1192
148
87
0
2
1427
0
1200
33
3
0
31
1236
3704
12:00 PM
57
81
18
0
0
0
156
34
30
54
1
0
1
119
0
301
43
20
0
0
364
0
305
3
0
0
24
308
947
12:15 PM
42
79
16
3
0
0
140
45
33
71
0
0
1
149
0
319
21
21
0
0
361
0
327
5
1
0
3
333
983
12:30 PM
45
72
18
0
0
0
135
29
22
50
1
0
1
102
0
339
33
16
0
0
388
0
338
13
1
0
6
352
977
12:45 PM
52
63
17
0
0
2
132
40
33
53
0
0
0
126
0
269
36
24
0
0
329
0
357
3
1
0
11
361
948
Hourly Total
196
295
69
3
0
2
563
148
118
228
2
0
3
496
0
1228
133
81
0
0
1442
0
1327
24
3
0
44
1354
3855
1:00 PM
55
61
15
0
0
0
131
32
31
39
2
0
1
104
0
325
32
20
0
3
377
0
343
4
3
0
10
350
962
1:15 PM
60
66
12
0
0
0
138
36
27
53
1
0
0
117
0
309
37
16
0
0
362
0
305
7
2
0
5
314
931
1:30 PM
43
65
6
0
0
0
114
33
26
56
0
0
3
115
0
327
32
22
0
2
381
0
328
6
0
0
8
334
944
1:45 PM
55
64
28
0
0
6
147
36
30
51
1
0
1
118
0
373
37
23
0
1
433
0
310
10
2
0
16
322
1020
Hourly Total
213
256
61
0
0
6
530
137
114
199
4
0
5
454
0
1334
138
81
0
6
1553
0
1286
27
7
0
39
1320
3857
2:00 PM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Grand
Total
646
814
199
3
0
9
1662
412
339
652
19
0
13
1422
0
3754
419
249
0
8
4422
0
3813
84
13
0
114
3910
11416
Approach
%
38.9
49.0
12.0
0.2
0.0
-
-
29.0
23.8
45.9
1.3
0.0
-
-
0.0
84.9
9.5
5.6
0.0
-
-
0.0
97.5
2.1
0.3
0.0
-
-
-
Total %
5.7
7.1
1.7
0.0
0.0
-
14.6
3.6
3.0
5.7
0.2
0.0
-
12.5
0.0
32.9
3.7
2.2
0.0
-
38.7
0.0
33.4
0.7
0.1
0.0
-
34.3
-
Lights
636
811
197
3
0
-
1647
412
336
642
19
0
-
1409
0
3665
415
248
0
-
4328
0
3734
80
13
0
-
3827
11211
% Lights
98.5
99.6
99.0
100.0
-
-
99.1
100.0 99.1
98.5
100.0
-
-
99.1
-
97.6
99.0
99.6
-
-
97.9
-
97.9
95.2
100.0
-
-
97.9
98.2
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
2
0
0
-
2
0
5
0
0
0
-
5
0
4
0
0
0
-
4
11
% Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
-
-
0.1
-
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.1
-
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.1
0.1
Trucks
10
3
2
0
0
-
15
0
3
8
0
0
-
11
0
84
4
1
0
-
89
0
75
4
0
0
-
79
194
% Trucks
1.5
0.4
1.0
0.0
-
-
0.9
0.0
0.9
1.2
0.0
-
-
0.8
-
2.2
1.0
0.4
-
-
2.0
-
2.0
4.8
0.0
-
-
2.0
1.7
Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
% Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
15.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
25.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.6
-
-
Pedestrian
s
-
-
-
-
-
9
-
-
-
-
-
-
11
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
111
-
-
%
Pedestrian
s
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
84.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
75.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
97.4
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 2
10/08/2022 11:00 AM
Ending At
10/08/2022 2:15 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
4962
3827
8789
7
4
11
102
79
181
0
0
0
0
0
0
5071
3910
8981
93
3734
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
4
75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
111
97
3813
0
0
114
R
T
L
U
P
1482
0
0
8
0
1474
Out
1422
0
0
11
2
1409
In
2904
0
0
19
2
2883
Total
Lafante Way [WB]
R
671
0
0
8
2
661
T
339
0
0
3
0
336
L
412
0
0
0
0
412
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
13
11
2
0
0
0
4346
4328
8674
4
5
9
77
89
166
0
0
0
0
0
0
4427
4422
8849
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
L
T
R
P
0
0
3665
663
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
84
5
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
3754
668
8
32nd St [EB]
Total
2076
0
22
0
0
2098
In
1647
0
15
0
0
1662
Out
429
0
7
0
0
436
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
636
0
10
0
0
646
L
811
0
3
0
0
814
T
200
0
2
0
0
202
R
0
0
0
0
9
9
P
Turning Movement Data Plot
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 3
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (12:15 PM)
Start
Time
32nd St
Lafante Way
Rte 440
Rte 440
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Left
Thru Righ
t
Righ
t on
Red
U-
Turn
Ped
s
App.
Tota
l
Int.
Tota
l
12:15 PM
42
79
16
3
0
0
140
45
33
71
0
0
1
149
0
319
21
21
0
0
361
0
327
5
1
0
3
333
983
12:30 PM
45
72
18
0
0
0
135
29
22
50
1
0
1
102
0
339
33
16
0
0
388
0
338
13
1
0
6
352
977
12:45 PM
52
63
17
0
0
2
132
40
33
53
0
0
0
126
0
269
36
24
0
0
329
0
357
3
1
0
11
361
948
1:00 PM
55
61
15
0
0
0
131
32
31
39
2
0
1
104
0
325
32
20
0
3
377
0
343
4
3
0
10
350
962
Total
194
275
66
3
0
2
538
146
119
213
3
0
3
481
0
1252
122
81
0
3
1455
0
1365
25
6
0
30
1396
3870
Approach
%
36.1
51.1
12.3
0.6
0.0
-
-
30.4
24.7
44.3
0.6
0.0
-
-
0.0
86.0
8.4
5.6
0.0
-
-
0.0
97.8
1.8
0.4
0.0
-
-
-
Total %
5.0
7.1
1.7
0.1
0.0
-
13.9
3.8
3.1
5.5
0.1
0.0
-
12.4
0.0
32.4
3.2
2.1
0.0
-
37.6
0.0
35.3
0.6
0.2
0.0
-
36.1
-
PHF
0.88
2
0.870
0.917
0.250
0.000
-
0.961
0.811
0.902
0.750
0.375
0.000
-
0.807
0.000
0.923
0.847
0.844
0.000
-
0.938
0.000
0.956
0.481
0.500
0.000
-
0.967
0.984
Lights
190
274
65
3
0
-
532
146
118
210
3
0
-
477
0
1236
121
80
0
-
1437
0
1336
23
6
0
-
1365
3811
% Lights
97.9
99.6
98.5
100.0
-
-
98.9
100.0 99.2
98.6
100.0
-
-
99.2
-
98.7
99.2
98.8
-
-
98.8
-
97.9
92.0
100.0
-
-
97.8
98.5
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
1
0
0
0
-
1
0
2
0
0
0
-
2
3
% Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.0
-
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.1
-
0.1
0.0
0.0
-
-
0.1
0.1
Trucks
4
1
1
0
0
-
6
0
1
3
0
0
-
4
0
15
1
1
0
-
17
0
27
2
0
0
-
29
56
% Trucks
2.1
0.4
1.5
0.0
-
-
1.1
0.0
0.8
1.4
0.0
-
-
0.8
-
1.2
0.8
1.2
-
-
1.2
-
2.0
8.0
0.0
-
-
2.1
1.4
Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
% Bicycles
on
Crosswalk
-
-
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
33.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
33.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.3
-
-
Pedestrian
s
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
29
-
-
%
Pedestrian
s
-
-
-
-
-
100.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
66.7
-
-
-
-
-
-
66.7
-
-
-
-
-
-
96.7
-
-
Bayonne, NJ
Route 440 & 32nd St/Lafante
Way
Saturday, October 8, 2022
Location: 40.669076, -
74.107853
www.TSTData.com
184 Baker Rd
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, United States 19320
610-466-1469
Serving Transportation Professionals Since 1995
Count Name: Rte 440 & 32nd
St/Lafante Way (10/8)
Site Code:
Start Date: 10/08/2022
Page No: 4
Peak Hour Data
10/08/2022 12:15 PM
Ending At
10/08/2022 1:15 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Bicycles on Crosswalk
Pedestrians
Rte 440 [SB]
Out
In
Total
1639
1365
3004
1
2
3
22
29
51
0
0
0
0
0
0
1662
1396
3058
29
1336
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
29
31
1365
0
0
30
R
T
L
U
P
478
0
0
3
0
475
Out
481
0
0
4
0
477
In
959
0
0
7
0
952
Total
Lafante Way [WB]
R
216
0
0
3
0
213
T
119
0
0
1
0
118
L
146
0
0
0
0
146
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
3
2
1
0
0
0
1550
1437
2987
2
1
3
28
17
45
0
0
0
0
0
0
1580
1455
3035
Out
In
Total
Rte 440 [NB]
U
L
T
R
P
0
0
1236
201
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
15
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1252
203
3
32nd St [EB]
Total
679
0
9
0
0
688
In
532
0
6
0
0
538
Out
147
0
3
0
0
150
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
190
0
4
0
0
194
L
274
0
1
0
0
275
T
68
0
1
0
0
69
R
0
0
0
0
2
2
P
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (12:15 PM)
ATR Data
Page 1
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/5/2022
Total
Time
Wed
NB
SB
12:00 AM
*
*
*
12:15
*
*
*
12:30
*
*
*
12:45
*
*
*
01:00
*
*
*
01:15
*
*
*
01:30
*
*
*
01:45
*
*
*
02:00
*
*
*
02:15
*
*
*
02:30
*
*
*
02:45
*
*
*
03:00
*
*
*
03:15
*
*
*
03:30
*
*
*
03:45
*
*
*
04:00
*
*
*
04:15
*
*
*
04:30
*
*
*
04:45
*
*
*
05:00
*
*
*
05:15
*
*
*
05:30
*
*
*
05:45
*
*
*
06:00
*
*
*
06:15
*
*
*
06:30
*
*
*
06:45
*
*
*
07:00
*
*
*
07:15
*
*
*
07:30
*
*
*
07:45
*
*
*
08:00
*
*
*
08:15
*
*
*
08:30
*
*
*
08:45
*
*
*
09:00
*
*
*
09:15
*
*
*
09:30
*
*
*
09:45
*
*
*
10:00
*
*
*
10:15
*
*
*
10:30
*
*
*
10:45
*
*
*
11:00
*
*
*
11:15
*
*
*
11:30
*
*
*
11:45
*
*
*
Total
0
0
0
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
Peak
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Vol.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P.H.F.
Page 2
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/5/2022
Total
Time
Wed
NB
SB
12:00 PM
412
388
800
12:15
358
368
726
12:30
370
342
712
12:45
419
360
779
01:00
391
368
759
01:15
422
344
766
01:30
363
358
721
01:45
388
372
760
02:00
366
413
779
02:15
396
428
824
02:30
424
438
862
02:45
444
396
840
03:00
453
454
907
03:15
432
461
893
03:30
410
499
909
03:45
380
537
917
04:00
362
497
859
04:15
352
516
868
04:30
417
533
950
04:45
388
520
908
05:00
393
547
940
05:15
414
542
956
05:30
360
516
876
05:45
349
466
815
06:00
348
518
866
06:15
322
496
818
06:30
346
443
789
06:45
332
420
752
07:00
326
395
721
07:15
326
338
664
07:30
279
395
674
07:45
276
331
607
08:00
260
280
540
08:15
224
253
477
08:30
226
233
459
08:45
192
210
402
09:00
185
238
423
09:15
169
200
369
09:30
156
195
351
09:45
150
192
342
10:00
130
158
288
10:15
118
148
266
10:30
80
144
224
10:45
134
117
251
11:00
82
113
195
11:15
84
120
204
11:30
72
94
166
11:45
50
84
134
Total
14330
16778
31108
Percent
46.1%
53.9%
Peak
-
14:30
16:30
-
-
-
-
-
-
16:30
Vol.
-
1753
2142
-
-
-
-
-
-
3754
P.H.F.
0.967
0.979
0.982
Page 3
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/6/2022
Total
Time
Thu
NB
SB
12:00 AM
69
90
159
12:15
40
82
122
12:30
49
61
110
12:45
46
65
111
01:00
33
42
75
01:15
40
55
95
01:30
31
34
65
01:45
36
42
78
02:00
33
32
65
02:15
26
40
66
02:30
26
24
50
02:45
26
33
59
03:00
42
29
71
03:15
28
30
58
03:30
64
40
104
03:45
34
58
92
04:00
57
36
93
04:15
51
55
106
04:30
102
80
182
04:45
136
88
224
05:00
160
88
248
05:15
202
134
336
05:30
257
154
411
05:45
316
214
530
06:00
334
202
536
06:15
338
272
610
06:30
462
294
756
06:45
459
318
777
07:00
558
267
825
07:15
612
286
898
07:30
583
274
857
07:45
585
299
884
08:00
626
306
932
08:15
574
356
930
08:30
568
348
916
08:45
534
336
870
09:00
516
302
818
09:15
454
270
724
09:30
454
280
734
09:45
467
256
723
10:00
469
294
763
10:15
420
322
742
10:30
430
301
731
10:45
388
318
706
11:00
400
346
746
11:15
389
379
768
11:30
375
328
703
11:45
363
382
745
Total
13262
8942
22204
Percent
59.7%
40.3%
Peak
-
07:15
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
07:45
Vol.
-
2406
1435
-
-
-
-
-
-
3662
P.H.F.
0.961
0.939
0.982
Page 4
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/6/2022
Total
Time
Thu
NB
SB
12:00 PM
379
338
717
12:15
402
349
751
12:30
374
352
726
12:45
380
369
749
01:00
417
322
739
01:15
388
375
763
01:30
374
353
727
01:45
391
384
775
02:00
418
387
805
02:15
408
460
868
02:30
361
408
769
02:45
405
392
797
03:00
411
427
838
03:15
347
426
773
03:30
416
484
900
03:45
305
434
739
04:00
409
436
845
04:15
400
468
868
04:30
395
494
889
04:45
404
428
832
05:00
406
428
834
05:15
422
476
898
05:30
418
494
912
05:45
400
582
982
06:00
363
494
857
06:15
386
523
909
06:30
364
516
880
06:45
378
522
900
07:00
386
554
940
07:15
314
531
845
07:30
299
426
725
07:45
329
363
692
08:00
326
341
667
08:15
282
284
566
08:30
244
296
540
08:45
220
248
468
09:00
206
246
452
09:15
218
214
432
09:30
149
189
338
09:45
186
184
370
10:00
147
193
340
10:15
134
170
304
10:30
133
134
267
10:45
86
141
227
11:00
98
132
230
11:15
78
144
222
11:30
84
120
204
11:45
66
90
156
Total
14906
17121
32027
Percent
46.5%
53.5%
Peak
-
16:45
18:30
-
-
-
-
-
-
17:30
Vol.
-
1650
2123
-
-
-
-
-
-
3660
P.H.F.
0.977
0.958
0.932
Page 5
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/7/2022
Total
Time
Fri
NB
SB
12:00 AM
40
112
152
12:15
58
92
150
12:30
60
84
144
12:45
70
68
138
01:00
39
84
123
01:15
36
62
98
01:30
53
60
113
01:45
42
53
95
02:00
34
53
87
02:15
28
47
75
02:30
35
50
85
02:45
22
45
67
03:00
47
46
93
03:15
40
55
95
03:30
56
46
102
03:45
52
51
103
04:00
78
60
138
04:15
90
63
153
04:30
88
70
158
04:45
119
90
209
05:00
166
104
270
05:15
197
132
329
05:30
256
134
390
05:45
268
219
487
06:00
312
210
522
06:15
334
256
590
06:30
436
290
726
06:45
416
339
755
07:00
491
293
784
07:15
534
278
812
07:30
548
298
846
07:45
486
295
781
08:00
437
362
799
08:15
444
355
799
08:30
454
370
824
08:45
428
380
808
09:00
382
336
718
09:15
377
364
741
09:30
356
276
632
09:45
395
300
695
10:00
400
320
720
10:15
388
351
739
10:30
392
334
726
10:45
413
341
754
11:00
400
348
748
11:15
360
368
728
11:30
392
374
766
11:45
440
440
880
Total
11989
9758
21747
Percent
55.1%
44.9%
Peak
-
07:00
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
07:15
Vol.
-
2059
1530
-
-
-
-
-
-
3238
P.H.F.
0.939
0.869
0.957
Page 6
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/7/2022
Total
Time
Fri
NB
SB
12:00 PM
420
429
849
12:15
412
413
825
12:30
401
433
834
12:45
422
384
806
01:00
422
384
806
01:15
414
422
836
01:30
380
396
776
01:45
392
364
756
02:00
460
393
853
02:15
409
478
887
02:30
436
486
922
02:45
422
462
884
03:00
448
452
900
03:15
432
432
864
03:30
427
474
901
03:45
397
464
861
04:00
369
519
888
04:15
394
562
956
04:30
430
581
1011
04:45
425
554
979
05:00
425
567
992
05:15
370
592
962
05:30
440
593
1033
05:45
448
585
1033
06:00
456
559
1015
06:15
446
540
986
06:30
434
571
1005
06:45
390
532
922
07:00
394
505
899
07:15
357
428
785
07:30
378
418
796
07:45
340
367
707
08:00
346
344
690
08:15
398
326
724
08:30
306
276
582
08:45
283
286
569
09:00
248
242
490
09:15
228
264
492
09:30
202
226
428
09:45
210
222
432
10:00
210
201
411
10:15
166
198
364
10:30
147
185
332
10:45
149
164
313
11:00
134
177
311
11:15
125
182
307
11:30
112
168
280
11:45
80
146
226
Total
16534
18946
35480
Percent
46.6%
53.4%
Peak
-
17:30
17:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
17:30
Vol.
-
1790
2337
-
-
-
-
-
-
4067
P.H.F.
0.981
0.985
0.984
Page 7
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/8/2022
Total
Time
Sat
NB
SB
12:00 AM
74
150
224
12:15
97
128
225
12:30
47
107
154
12:45
55
88
143
01:00
48
80
128
01:15
30
80
110
01:30
45
80
125
01:45
53
67
120
02:00
48
58
106
02:15
30
60
90
02:30
37
67
104
02:45
46
72
118
03:00
29
56
85
03:15
31
54
85
03:30
35
66
101
03:45
34
45
79
04:00
44
41
85
04:15
38
34
72
04:30
47
36
83
04:45
37
48
85
05:00
64
43
107
05:15
73
60
133
05:30
94
60
154
05:45
87
84
171
06:00
124
78
202
06:15
134
86
220
06:30
170
140
310
06:45
200
138
338
07:00
150
134
284
07:15
198
130
328
07:30
240
154
394
07:45
248
178
426
08:00
230
204
434
08:15
284
188
472
08:30
312
224
536
08:45
312
252
564
09:00
392
246
638
09:15
400
242
642
09:30
429
288
717
09:45
504
294
798
10:00
429
325
754
10:15
416
288
704
10:30
424
336
760
10:45
454
398
852
11:00
406
366
772
11:15
472
391
863
11:30
476
397
873
11:45
458
410
868
Total
9085
7551
16636
Percent
54.6%
45.4%
Peak
-
11:00
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
11:00
Vol.
-
1812
1564
-
-
-
-
-
-
3376
P.H.F.
0.952
0.954
0.967
Page 8
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/8/2022
Total
Time
Sat
NB
SB
12:00 PM
449
413
862
12:15
465
445
910
12:30
456
414
870
12:45
392
454
846
01:00
452
432
884
01:15
444
400
844
01:30
433
423
856
01:45
480
415
895
02:00
469
394
863
02:15
446
428
874
02:30
488
432
920
02:45
493
424
917
03:00
424
447
871
03:15
387
436
823
03:30
442
434
876
03:45
389
428
817
04:00
403
486
889
04:15
418
458
876
04:30
342
446
788
04:45
370
470
840
05:00
356
526
882
05:15
427
508
935
05:30
386
520
906
05:45
392
512
904
06:00
369
522
891
06:15
376
472
848
06:30
359
527
886
06:45
376
498
874
07:00
367
515
882
07:15
320
496
816
07:30
366
488
854
07:45
344
416
760
08:00
270
380
650
08:15
306
420
726
08:30
218
446
664
08:45
266
417
683
09:00
224
437
661
09:15
240
323
563
09:30
196
253
449
09:45
187
314
501
10:00
188
243
431
10:15
158
224
382
10:30
192
186
378
10:45
144
182
326
11:00
142
161
303
11:15
126
134
260
11:30
104
130
234
11:45
88
149
237
Total
16129
19078
35207
Percent
45.8%
54.2%
Peak
-
14:00
17:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
17:15
Vol.
-
1896
2066
-
-
-
-
-
-
3636
P.H.F.
0.961
0.982
0.972
Page 9
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/9/2022
Total
Time
Sun
NB
SB
12:00 AM
88
121
209
12:15
72
118
190
12:30
76
88
164
12:45
65
106
171
01:00
76
88
164
01:15
64
82
146
01:30
50
81
131
01:45
52
78
130
02:00
51
67
118
02:15
36
71
107
02:30
35
62
97
02:45
42
63
105
03:00
32
50
82
03:15
27
54
81
03:30
29
62
91
03:45
20
43
63
04:00
37
34
71
04:15
32
42
74
04:30
25
34
59
04:45
31
42
73
05:00
49
33
82
05:15
54
36
90
05:30
73
50
123
05:45
67
90
157
06:00
81
85
166
06:15
90
83
173
06:30
106
104
210
06:45
107
126
233
07:00
113
157
270
07:15
131
153
284
07:30
162
149
311
07:45
167
138
305
08:00
188
146
334
08:15
230
152
382
08:30
234
224
458
08:45
250
234
484
09:00
266
228
494
09:15
304
216
520
09:30
332
238
570
09:45
373
250
623
10:00
424
252
676
10:15
456
229
685
10:30
382
281
663
10:45
364
288
652
11:00
392
320
712
11:15
425
327
752
11:30
391
320
711
11:45
406
329
735
Total
7557
6624
14181
Percent
53.3%
46.7%
Peak
-
09:45
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
11:00
Vol.
-
1635
1296
-
-
-
-
-
-
2910
P.H.F.
0.896
0.985
0.967
Page 10
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/9/2022
Total
Time
Sun
NB
SB
12:00 PM
431
353
784
12:15
435
361
796
12:30
418
322
740
12:45
418
364
782
01:00
389
415
804
01:15
417
364
781
01:30
403
386
789
01:45
414
438
852
02:00
402
420
822
02:15
418
416
834
02:30
391
405
796
02:45
390
413
803
03:00
376
454
830
03:15
372
486
858
03:30
375
511
886
03:45
368
506
874
04:00
382
554
936
04:15
335
530
865
04:30
355
514
869
04:45
348
486
834
05:00
314
485
799
05:15
313
492
805
05:30
324
508
832
05:45
309
486
795
06:00
288
477
765
06:15
322
484
806
06:30
282
522
804
06:45
290
498
788
07:00
240
450
690
07:15
268
490
758
07:30
236
518
754
07:45
260
451
711
08:00
222
425
647
08:15
226
495
721
08:30
218
475
693
08:45
200
472
672
09:00
209
414
623
09:15
176
406
582
09:30
156
348
504
09:45
142
340
482
10:00
146
258
404
10:15
139
168
307
10:30
136
147
283
10:45
126
178
304
11:00
112
160
272
11:15
83
154
237
11:30
84
100
184
11:45
60
90
150
Total
13718
19189
32907
Percent
41.7%
58.3%
Peak
-
12:00
15:45
-
-
-
-
-
-
15:30
Vol.
-
1702
2104
-
-
-
-
-
-
3561
P.H.F.
0.978
0.949
0.951
Page 11
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/10/2022
Total
Time
Mon
NB
SB
12:00 AM
46
81
127
12:15
54
80
134
12:30
46
83
129
12:45
40
64
104
01:00
36
61
97
01:15
28
54
82
01:30
41
56
97
01:45
36
26
62
02:00
38
33
71
02:15
30
42
72
02:30
30
33
63
02:45
26
42
68
03:00
38
20
58
03:15
38
29
67
03:30
39
39
78
03:45
38
50
88
04:00
51
42
93
04:15
48
32
80
04:30
74
58
132
04:45
94
70
164
05:00
116
71
187
05:15
168
92
260
05:30
194
130
324
05:45
188
159
347
06:00
212
141
353
06:15
266
205
471
06:30
283
234
517
06:45
296
244
540
07:00
316
215
531
07:15
358
270
628
07:30
350
236
586
07:45
362
238
600
08:00
304
248
552
08:15
370
236
606
08:30
370
222
592
08:45
414
228
642
09:00
345
259
604
09:15
335
233
568
09:30
343
212
555
09:45
370
270
640
10:00
356
266
622
10:15
369
300
669
10:30
396
318
714
10:45
354
337
691
11:00
350
329
679
11:15
311
324
635
11:30
310
375
685
11:45
314
358
672
Total
9591
7745
17336
Percent
55.3%
44.7%
Peak
-
08:15
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
10:15
Vol.
-
1499
1386
-
-
-
-
-
-
2753
P.H.F.
0.905
0.924
0.964
Page 12
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/10/2022
Total
Time
Mon
NB
SB
12:00 PM
362
382
744
12:15
354
388
742
12:30
344
382
726
12:45
337
400
737
01:00
382
375
757
01:15
389
368
757
01:30
379
354
733
01:45
381
400
781
02:00
402
400
802
02:15
373
374
747
02:30
424
396
820
02:45
430
413
843
03:00
417
430
847
03:15
371
416
787
03:30
372
394
766
03:45
334
446
780
04:00
392
422
814
04:15
347
446
793
04:30
427
509
936
04:45
350
480
830
05:00
392
520
912
05:15
348
528
876
05:30
402
552
954
05:45
390
502
892
06:00
372
504
876
06:15
343
520
863
06:30
325
556
881
06:45
320
564
884
07:00
322
529
851
07:15
305
407
712
07:30
305
348
653
07:45
246
326
572
08:00
218
310
528
08:15
226
282
508
08:30
214
242
456
08:45
194
216
410
09:00
176
248
424
09:15
142
198
340
09:30
150
154
304
09:45
132
155
287
10:00
138
152
290
10:15
104
130
234
10:30
118
116
234
10:45
114
105
219
11:00
86
127
213
11:15
76
122
198
11:30
83
64
147
11:45
68
74
142
Total
13876
16726
30602
Percent
45.3%
54.7%
Peak
-
14:15
18:15
-
-
-
-
-
-
17:00
Vol.
-
1644
2169
-
-
-
-
-
-
3634
P.H.F.
0.956
0.961
0.952
Page 13
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/11/2022
Total
Time
Tue
NB
SB
12:00 AM
62
76
138
12:15
48
64
112
12:30
43
75
118
12:45
47
62
109
01:00
35
49
84
01:15
27
34
61
01:30
40
56
96
01:45
28
22
50
02:00
22
38
60
02:15
20
44
64
02:30
32
32
64
02:45
26
34
60
03:00
28
32
60
03:15
43
37
80
03:30
59
47
106
03:45
46
54
100
04:00
66
44
110
04:15
67
42
109
04:30
92
76
168
04:45
120
101
221
05:00
172
114
286
05:15
175
116
291
05:30
253
170
423
05:45
300
168
468
06:00
272
205
477
06:15
396
236
632
06:30
412
302
714
06:45
426
284
710
07:00
521
256
777
07:15
548
260
808
07:30
646
276
922
07:45
580
298
878
08:00
562
324
886
08:15
613
364
977
08:30
624
345
969
08:45
649
331
980
09:00
536
300
836
09:15
484
270
754
09:30
418
268
686
09:45
364
280
644
10:00
397
310
707
10:15
390
318
708
10:30
373
320
693
10:45
335
331
666
11:00
223
337
560
11:15
336
341
677
11:30
374
382
756
11:45
382
366
748
Total
12712
8891
21603
Percent
58.8%
41.2%
Peak
-
08:00
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
08:00
Vol.
-
2448
1426
-
-
-
-
-
-
3812
P.H.F.
0.943
0.933
0.972
Page 14
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/11/2022
Total
Time
Tue
NB
SB
12:00 PM
360
364
724
12:15
426
344
770
12:30
358
338
696
12:45
360
352
712
01:00
390
314
704
01:15
381
330
711
01:30
355
338
693
01:45
362
370
732
02:00
390
390
780
02:15
396
403
799
02:30
428
408
836
02:45
414
432
846
03:00
412
466
878
03:15
360
472
832
03:30
412
444
856
03:45
322
459
781
04:00
392
475
867
04:15
357
490
847
04:30
424
545
969
04:45
362
523
885
05:00
369
513
882
05:15
386
535
921
05:30
413
566
979
05:45
377
506
883
06:00
354
518
872
06:15
355
526
881
06:30
328
462
790
06:45
362
433
795
07:00
338
386
724
07:15
325
334
659
07:30
288
338
626
07:45
258
332
590
08:00
252
300
552
08:15
231
262
493
08:30
214
246
460
08:45
163
228
391
09:00
175
248
423
09:15
172
204
376
09:30
138
188
326
09:45
146
168
314
10:00
124
141
265
10:15
118
150
268
10:30
100
133
233
10:45
96
120
216
11:00
92
138
230
11:15
74
154
228
11:30
92
114
206
11:45
65
98
163
Total
14066
16598
30664
Percent
45.9%
54.1%
Peak
-
14:15
16:45
-
-
-
-
-
-
16:45
Vol.
-
1650
2137
-
-
-
-
-
-
3667
P.H.F.
0.964
0.944
0.936
Page 15
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/12/2022
Total
Time
Wed
NB
SB
12:00 AM
79
94
173
12:15
74
61
135
12:30
64
75
139
12:45
48
75
123
01:00
55
66
121
01:15
38
54
92
01:30
44
40
84
01:45
46
46
92
02:00
37
46
83
02:15
39
53
92
02:30
24
40
64
02:45
36
52
88
03:00
57
30
87
03:15
43
50
93
03:30
56
58
114
03:45
51
68
119
04:00
76
66
142
04:15
78
54
132
04:30
76
72
148
04:45
126
96
222
05:00
166
118
284
05:15
195
114
309
05:30
304
160
464
05:45
298
192
490
06:00
316
199
515
06:15
403
266
669
06:30
420
307
727
06:45
505
318
823
07:00
576
250
826
07:15
626
282
908
07:30
638
298
936
07:45
704
308
1012
08:00
658
345
1003
08:15
680
324
1004
08:30
732
384
1116
08:45
686
350
1036
09:00
585
304
889
09:15
418
290
708
09:30
402
308
710
09:45
421
283
704
10:00
400
284
684
10:15
412
293
705
10:30
376
334
710
10:45
322
348
670
11:00
397
378
775
11:15
374
357
731
11:30
361
371
732
11:45
369
372
741
Total
13891
9333
23224
Percent
59.8%
40.2%
Peak
-
07:45
11:00
-
-
-
-
-
-
08:00
Vol.
-
2774
1478
-
-
-
-
-
-
4159
P.H.F.
0.947
0.978
0.932
Page 16
Road: Rt. 440
Location: 155 ft N of E. 32nd St
Counter: 35221 & 36995
Site Code: 1
Station ID:
Latitude: 40' 66953.0000 North
Longitude: 74' 10759.0000 West
Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc.
610-466-1469
TSTData.com
Start
10/12/2022
Total
Time
Wed
NB
SB
12:00 PM
409
386
795
12:15
380
377
757
12:30
372
360
732
12:45
412
373
785
01:00
398
374
772
01:15
405
380
785
01:30
422
352
774
01:45
423
403
826
02:00
463
440
903
02:15
450
460
910
02:30
460
434
894
02:45
407
419
826
03:00
438
472
910
03:15
387
497
884
03:30
386
509
895
03:45
338
464
802
04:00
374
539
913
04:15
378
580
958
04:30
403
536
939
04:45
390
528
918
05:00
391
573
964
05:15
393
580
973
05:30
416
570
986
05:45
*
*
*
06:00
*
*
*
06:15
*
*
*
06:30
*
*
*
06:45
*
*
*
07:00
*
*
*
07:15
*
*
*
07:30
*
*
*
07:45
*
*
*
08:00
*
*
*
08:15
*
*
*
08:30
*
*
*
08:45
*
*
*
09:00
*
*
*
09:15
*
*
*
09:30
*
*
*
09:45
*
*
*
10:00
*
*
*
10:15
*
*
*
10:30
*
*
*
10:45
*
*
*
11:00
*
*
*
11:15
*
*
*
11:30
*
*
*
11:45
*
*
*
Total
9295
10606
19901
Percent
46.7%
53.3%
Peak
-
13:45
16:45
-
-
-
-
-
-
16:45
Vol.
-
1796
2251
-
-
-
-
-
-
3841
P.H.F.
0.970
0.970
0.974
Total
190941
193886
384827
Percent
49.6%
50.4%
ADT
ADT 52,221
AADT 52,221
Synchro - Existing AM
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 & Goldsborough Rd
01/25/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
371
162
1415
327
76
874
Future Volume (vph)
371
162
1415
327
76
874
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
150
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Frt
0.850
0.970
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4719
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
3319
1501
4719
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
19
73
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
417
180
1590
394
93
993
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
417
180
1984
0
93
993
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
6
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
64.0
5.0
64.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
71.0
14.0
71.0
Total Split (s)
28.0
23.0
74.0
23.0
97.0
Total Split (%)
22.4%
18.4%
59.2%
18.4%
77.6%
Maximum Green (s)
21.0
17.0
67.0
17.0
90.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 & Goldsborough Rd
01/25/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Min
None
C-Min
Walk Time (s)
37.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
27.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
0
Act Effct Green (s)
19.7
37.7
74.3
11.0
91.3
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.16
0.30
0.59
0.09
0.73
v/c Ratio
0.80
0.39
0.70
0.61
0.41
Control Delay
62.4
31.9
13.6
70.7
7.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
62.4
31.9
13.6
70.7
7.5
LOS
E
C
B
E
A
Approach Delay
53.2
13.6
12.9
Approach LOS
D
B
B
Queue Length 50th (ft)
169
102
185
74
145
Queue Length 95th (ft)
214
151
357
114
198
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
150
250
Base Capacity (vph)
578
537
2847
238
2418
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.72
0.34
0.70
0.39
0.41
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 100
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.80
Intersection Signal Delay: 19.9
Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.8%
ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 & Goldsborough Rd
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Route 440/Rt. 440 & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
01/25/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
134
188
78
46
68
84
0
1627
112
0
895
19
Future Volume (vph)
134
188
78
46
68
84
0
1627
112
0
895
19
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
12
12
12
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
12
14
Storage Length (ft)
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
215
Storage Lanes
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Ped Bike Factor
0.98
0.96
0.98
Frt
0.971
0.916
0.850
0.850
Flt Protected
0.985
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
0
3385
0
1711
1550
0
0
3374
1583
0
3343
1672
Flt Permitted
0.799
0.267
Satd. Flow (perm)
0
2702
0
481
1550
0
0
3374
1554
0
3343
1672
Right Turn on Red
No
No
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
61
61
Link Speed (mph)
30
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
377
419
540
623
Travel Time (s)
8.6
9.5
7.4
8.5
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)
78
78
7
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)
7
Peak Hour Factor
0.92
0.78
0.84
0.85
0.90
0.86
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.97
0.73
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
6%
2%
7%
2%
2%
8%
3%
Adj. Flow (vph)
146
241
93
54
76
98
0
1768
122
0
923
26
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
0
480
0
54
174
0
0
1768
122
0
923
26
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Median Width(ft)
11
11
0
0
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.04
1.04
1.04
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.92
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
15
9
15
9
15
9
Turn Type
Perm
NA
pm+pt
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Perm
Protected Phases
4
3
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
6
Detector Phase
4
4
3
8
2
2
6
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
7.0
5.0
7.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
13.0
45.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
Total Split (s)
32.0
32.0
13.0
45.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
Total Split (%)
25.6%
25.6%
10.4%
36.0%
64.0%
64.0%
64.0%
64.0%
Maximum Green (s)
25.0
25.0
10.0
38.0
73.0
73.0
73.0
73.0
Yellow Time (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
4.0
4.0
0.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
3.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Route 440/Rt. 440 & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
01/25/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Recall Mode
None
None
None
None
C-Min
C-Min
C-Min
C-Min
Walk Time (s)
13.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
31.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
5
10
10
10
10
Act Effct Green (s)
25.0
37.7
33.7
77.3
77.3
77.3
77.3
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.20
0.30
0.27
0.62
0.62
0.62
0.62
v/c Ratio
0.89
0.25
0.42
0.85
0.12
0.45
0.02
Control Delay
67.7
32.1
39.6
25.4
6.2
14.0
1.1
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
67.7
32.1
39.6
25.4
6.2
14.0
1.1
LOS
E
C
D
C
A
B
A
Approach Delay
67.7
37.8
24.2
13.6
Approach LOS
E
D
C
B
Queue Length 50th (ft)
194
30
111
620
20
281
0
Queue Length 95th (ft)
223
57
177
753
48
326
m2
Internal Link Dist (ft)
297
339
460
543
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50
215
Base Capacity (vph)
559
243
471
2085
983
2066
1056
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.86
0.22
0.37
0.85
0.12
0.45
0.02
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 120
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.89
Intersection Signal Delay: 28.1
Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 119.7%
ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period (min) 15
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 5: Route 440/Rt. 440 & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Synchro – Existing PM
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & Goldsborough Rd
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
524
200
1116
380
222
1385
Future Volume (vph)
524
200
1116
380
222
1385
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
150
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Frt
0.850
0.960
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
3319
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
40
108
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
589
222
1254
458
271
1574
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
589
222
1712
0
271
1574
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Number of Detectors
1
1
0
1
0
Detector Template
Left
Right
Left
Leading Detector (ft)
20
20
0
20
0
Trailing Detector (ft)
0
0
0
0
0
Detector 1 Position(ft)
0
0
0
0
0
Detector 1 Size(ft)
20
20
6
20
6
Detector 1 Type
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
6
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
64.0
5.0
64.0
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & Goldsborough Rd
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
71.0
14.0
71.0
Total Split (s)
31.0
23.0
71.0
23.0
94.0
Total Split (%)
24.8%
18.4%
56.8%
18.4%
75.2%
Maximum Green (s)
24.0
17.0
64.0
17.0
87.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Min
None
C-Min
Walk Time (s)
37.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
27.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
0
Act Effct Green (s)
23.6
48.0
64.0
17.4
87.4
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.19
0.38
0.51
0.14
0.70
v/c Ratio
0.94
0.37
0.70
1.11
0.69
Control Delay
74.2
24.5
30.5
139.9
12.9
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
74.2
24.5
30.5
139.9
12.9
LOS
E
C
C
F
B
Approach Delay
60.6
30.5
31.5
Approach LOS
E
C
C
Queue Length 50th (ft)
243
103
418
~255
354
Queue Length 95th (ft)
#343
173
471
#373
409
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
150
250
Base Capacity (vph)
637
601
2455
244
2295
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.92
0.37
0.70
1.11
0.69
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 120
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.11
Intersection Signal Delay: 36.5
Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2%
ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min) 15
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & Goldsborough Rd
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & Goldsborough Rd
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
114
237
101
127
114
212
0
1209
178
0
1451
26
Future Volume (vph)
114
237
101
127
114
212
0
1209
178
0
1451
26
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
12
12
12
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
12
14
Storage Length (ft)
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
215
Storage Lanes
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Ped Bike Factor
0.99
0.95
0.98
Frt
0.967
0.901
0.850
0.850
Flt Protected
0.989
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
0
3385
0
1711
1506
0
0
3374
1583
0
3343
1672
Flt Permitted
0.747
0.251
Satd. Flow (perm)
0
2534
0
452
1506
0
0
3374
1554
0
3343
1672
Right Turn on Red
No
No
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
61
61
Link Speed (mph)
30
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
377
419
540
623
Travel Time (s)
8.6
9.5
7.4
8.5
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)
78
78
7
Confl. Bikes (#/hr)
7
Peak Hour Factor
0.92
0.78
0.84
0.85
0.90
0.86
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.97
0.73
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
6%
2%
7%
2%
2%
8%
3%
Adj. Flow (vph)
124
304
120
149
127
247
0
1314
193
0
1496
36
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
0
548
0
149
374
0
0
1314
193
0
1496
36
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Median Width(ft)
11
11
0
0
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.04
1.04
1.04
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.92
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
15
9
15
9
15
9
Number of Detectors
1
2
1
2
0
1
0
0
Detector Template
Left
Thru
Left
Thru
Right
Leading Detector (ft)
20
100
20
100
0
20
0
0
Trailing Detector (ft)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Detector 1 Position(ft)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Detector 1 Size(ft)
20
6
20
6
6
20
6
20
Detector 1 Type
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft)
94
94
Detector 2 Size(ft)
6
6
Detector 2 Type
Cl+Ex
Cl+Ex
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s)
0.0
0.0
Turn Type
Perm
NA
pm+pt
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Perm
Protected Phases
4
3
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
6
Detector Phase
4
4
3
8
2
2
6
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
7.0
5.0
7.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
13.0
51.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
Total Split (s)
38.0
38.0
13.0
51.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
74.0
Total Split (%)
30.4%
30.4%
10.4%
40.8%
59.2%
59.2%
59.2%
59.2%
Maximum Green (s)
31.0
31.0
10.0
44.0
67.0
67.0
67.0
67.0
Yellow Time (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
4.0
4.0
0.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
3.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Recall Mode
None
None
None
None
C-Min
C-Min
C-Min
C-Min
Walk Time (s)
13.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
31.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
5
10
10
10
10
Act Effct Green (s)
29.4
46.4
42.4
68.6
68.6
68.6
68.6
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.24
0.37
0.34
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
v/c Ratio
0.92
0.56
0.73
0.71
0.22
0.82
0.04
Control Delay
68.5
35.0
45.5
24.0
10.9
31.1
2.8
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
68.5
35.0
45.5
24.0
10.9
31.1
2.8
LOS
E
C
D
C
B
C
A
Approach Delay
68.5
42.5
22.4
30.4
Approach LOS
E
D
C
C
Queue Length 50th (ft)
223
78
251
428
55
531
0
Queue Length 95th (ft)
246
123
379
495
96
m650
m1
Internal Link Dist (ft)
297
339
460
543
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50
215
Base Capacity (vph)
631
273
537
1866
887
1849
952
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.87
0.55
0.70
0.70
0.22
0.81
0.04
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 67 (54%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 125
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
01/23/2023
Scenario 1 4:51 pm 01/17/2023 Baseline
Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.92
Intersection Signal Delay: 34.1
Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 122.0%
ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period (min) 15
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 5: Route 440 NB/Route 440 SB & 32nd Street/LeFante Way
This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Appendix H
Aerial Plan and Photographs
175 |
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 1: Route 440 Northbound from Port Terminal Boulevard (Looking North)
Photo 2: Route 440 Northbound from Goldsborough Drive (Looking South)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 3: Existing NJ Transit Pedestrian Bridge Pier 3 (Looking West)
Photo 4: Rt. 440 in Foreground, Grass Area for Proposed East Landing in Middleground, CVS in
Background (Looking East from Existing NJ Transit Pedestrian Bridge)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 5: Goldsborough Drive (Looking East)
Photo 6: Goldsborough Drive (Looking West)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 7: Existing NJ Transit Pedestrian Bridge and Overhead Utilities (Looking West)
Photo 8: Rt. 440 Northbound at Left, Existing Overhead Utilities at Center, Proposed East Landing
Area at Right (Looking North)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 9: Rt. 440 Northbound in Foreground, Existing NJ Transit Pedestrian Bridge in Background
(Looking West)
Photo 10: Aerial Utilities Along Rt. 440 Northbound (Looking North)
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Concept Development Report
Photo 11: Existing Gas Line Markers along Rt. 440 Northbound (Looking Southwest)
Photo 12: Existing Traffic Signals at the Rt. 440 and Goldsborough Drive Intersection (Looking
Northeast)
Appendix I
Straight Line Diagram
183 |
Primary Direction
Secondary Direction
22
33
689
2
Interstate
Route
US Route
NJ Route
County
Road
Interchange
Number
Grade
Separated
Interchange
Traffic
Signal
Traffic
Monitoring
Sites
Road
Underpass
Road
Overpass
WIM
AVC
VOL
Units in miles
Primary
Direction
Secondary
Direction
287
DMS
Dyn Msg Sign
NJ 440 (South to North)
SRI = 00000440__
Mile Posts: 20.000 - 23.000
Date last inventoried: May 2016
Page Created: June, 2020
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
(22.60)
CONRAIL & NJ
TRANSIT
(22.66)
C.R.
(21.91)
Bayonne City, Hudson Co
(21.91)
Bayonne City, Hudson Co
(21.91)
Jersey City, Hudson Co
(21.91)
Jersey City, Hudson Co
STREET
(20.12) 21ST
(20.18) 22ND
STREET
NEW HOOK RD
(20.66)
30TH ST
(20.81)
32ND ST
(20.98)
LEFANTE WAY
PORT TERMINAL
PROSPECT AVE
(21.19)
(21.24) GOLDSBOROUGH RD
40TH ST
(21.49)
ACCESS RD
45TH ST
(21.70)
CENTER ST
(21.87) PULASKI ST
TO NEW JERSEY
(21.95)
TURNPIKE
HARBOR DR
(22.14)
(22.22)
(22.43)
(22.54)
GARFIELD
(22.79)
AVENUE
AVENUE
(22.94)
"C"
185
185
78
78
Street Name
Joseph A Lefante Memorial Highway
NJ 440
Jurisdiction
N.J.D.O.T.
Functional Class
Urban Principal Arterial
Federal Aid - NHS Sy
NHS
STRAHNET Conn.
NHS
Control Section
0921
0913
Speed Limit
50
40
Number of Lanes
2
3
2
1
2
Med. Type
Curbed
Positive
Med. Width
12
VAR
Pavement
24
12
24
Shoulder
12
14
10
10
Traffic Volume
33,074 (2017)
Traffic Sta. ID
3-1-020
Structure No.
0913151
0913152
1505 (DMS)
N00353F
0922150
0913153
0913158
0913160
0913157
Enlarged Views
Pavement
24
Shoulder
12
10
10
Number of Lanes
2
Speed Limit
50
40
Street Name
Joseph A Lefante Memorial Highway
NJ 440
The traffic signal at Route 440/Prospect
Ave./Port Terminal Blvd. is no longer present
and the median barrier has been closed.
Appendix J
Traffic Volume (VPH) Graphs
185 |
2045 Adjusted TMC
JOB
SHEET NO.
OF
CALCULATED BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
TITLE
Growth Rate
Source: NJDOT ACCESS PERMIT Annual Background Growth Rate Table
Valid for NJ Access Permits submitted April 2019 - April 2021
For use in short term (within 1 - 3 years) background growth ONLY.
County: Hudson
Functional Class Urban
Route 440 - Principal Arterial (Source: NJDOT Straight Line Diagram)
Goldsborough Dr. - Local
LeFante Way / 32nd Street - Local
Factor:
To be most conservative, use NJDOT growth rate. This will likely exceed what can actually be anticipated.
22TMS03A - Bayonne
2/8/2023
2/6/2023
1.00%
5
1
J. Coyle
J. Kleen
Traffic Volume Growth Factors
Consulting Engineers Construction Inspectors Land Surveyors
K:\+Projects\22TMS03A - Bayonne Ped Br LCD\Disciplines\Traffic\Synchro\22TMS03A Bayonne Ped Br 2045 Adjusted TMC.xlsx
OF
DATE
DATE
AM 2022 Peak Hour Volumes - Raw Data
SB
NB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
R
Total
15
219
0
0
373
82
66
45
800
Growth Factors / Year
15
207
0
0
325
91
116
29
783
Route 440
22
220
0
0
369
87
103
45
846
Goldsborough Dr
24
228
0
0
348
67
86
43
796
76
874
0
0
1415 327
371
162
3225
AM 2045 Peak Hour Volumes - Growth Factor Applied
SB
NB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
R
Total
19
276
0
0
469
104
83
57
1008
19
261
0
0
409
115
146
37
987
28
277
0
0
464
110
130
57
1066
31
287
0
0
438
85
109
55
1005
97 1101
0
0
1780 414
468
206
4066
8:15 AM
8:30 AM
8:45 AM
Total
Route 440
22TMS03A - Bayonne
2
5
Route 440
Goldsborough Dr.
8:00 AM
AM 2045 Peak Hour Volume Projections
Total
0.01
8:30 AM
8:45 AM
WB
2/6/2023
8:15 AM
Route 440
Route 440
Goldsborough Dr.
0.01
J. Coyle
J. Kleen
8:00 AM
WB
Consulting Engineers Construction Inspectors Land Surveyors
OF
DATE
DATE
PM 2022 Peak Hour Volumes - Raw Data
SB
NB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
R
Total
40
260
0
0
268
99
132
50
849
Growth Factors / Year
57
336
0
0
302
96
119
48
958
Route 440
57
350
0
0
285
88
156
57
993
Goldsborough Dr
40
260
0
0
261
97
117
45
820
194
1206
0
0
1116
380
524
200
3620
PM 2045 Peak Hour Volumes - Growth Factor Applied
SB
NB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
R
Total
51
327
0
0
337
125
166
63
1069
72
423
0
0
380
121
150
61
1207
72
441
0
0
359
111
197
72
1252
51
327
0
0
329
122
148
57
1034
246
1518
0
0
1405
479
661
253
4562
WB
WB
5:15 PM
5:30 PM
5:45 PM
Total
5:45 PM
Total
Route 440
Route 440
Goldsborough Dr.
5:00 PM
5:00 PM
5:15 PM
0.01
5:30 PM
0.01
Route 440
Route 440
Goldsborough Dr.
22TMS03A - Bayonne
3
5
J. Coyle
2/6/2023
J. Kleen
PM 2045 Peak Hour Volume Projections
Consulting Engineers Construction Inspectors Land Surveyors
OF
DATE
DATE
AM 2022 Peak Hour Volumes - Raw Data
SB
EB
NB
WB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Total
Growth Factor / Year
0
206
1
30
36
14
0
373
27
11
13
24
735
0
221
3
28
43
22
0
355
19
12
15
21
739
Route 440
0
237
7
37
54
20
0
477
39
9
15
24
919
32nd St. LeFante Way
0
231
8
39
55
22
0
422
27
14
25
15
858
0
895
19
134
188
78
0
1627 112
46
68
84
3251
AM 2045 Peak Hour Volumes - Growth Factor Applied
SB
EB
NB
WB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Total
0
259
2
38
46
18
0
469
34
14
17
31
928
0
278
4
36
55
28
0
447
24
16
19
27
934
0
298
9
47
68
26
0
600
50
12
19
31
1160
0
291
11
50
70
28
0
531
34
18
32
19
1084
0
1126 26
171
239
100
0
2047 142
60
87
108
4106
8:15 AM
8:30 AM
8:45 AM
Total
Route 440
8:00 AM
8:30 AM
0.01
LeFante Way
8:45 AM
Total
Route 440
32nd St.
AM 2045 Peak Hour Volume Projections
8:00 AM
8:15 AM
0.01
Route 440
32nd St.
Route 440
LeFante Way
22TMS03A - Bayonne
4
5
J. Coyle
2/6/2023
J. Kleen
Consulting Engineers Construction Inspectors Land Surveyors
OF
DATE
DATE
PM 2022 Peak Hour Volumes - Raw Data
SB
EB
NB
WB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Total
Growth Factor / Year
0
270
9
22
50
32
0
319
46
30
31
44
853
0
362
5
29
65
22
0
316
52
23
42
48
964
Route 440
0
417
7
31
57
33
0
288
43
37
29
61
1003
32nd St. LeFante Way
0
402
5
32
61
32
0
286
37
22
25
56
958
0
1451 26
114
233
119
0
1209 178
112
127
209
3778
PM 2045 Peak Hour Volumes - Growth Factor Applied
SB
EB
NB
WB
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Total
0
340
12
28
63
41
0
402
58
38
39
56
1077
0
456
7
37
82
28
0
398
66
29
53
61
1217
0
525
9
39
72
42
0
363
55
47
37
77
1266
0
506
7
41
77
41
0
360
47
28
32
71
1210
0
1827 35
145
294
152
0
1523 226
142
161
265
4770
Total
Route 440
5:00 PM
5:15 PM
5:30 PM
5:45 PM
LeFante Way
5:00 PM
5:15 PM
0.01
5:30 PM
0.01
5:45 PM
Total
Route 440
32nd St.
Route 440
LeFante Way
22TMS03A - Bayonne
5
5
J. Coyle
2/6/2023
J. Kleen
PM 2045 Peak Hour Volume Projections
Route 440
32nd St.
Consulting Engineers Construction Inspectors Land Surveyors
Goldsborough Drive 2045 No-build
AM Synchro
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 2 AM Peak 2045 No Build 8:40 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J.Coyle
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
468
206
1780
414
97
1101
Future Volume (vph)
468
206
1780
414
97
1101
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
175
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Frt
0.850
0.970
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4720
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
3319
1501
4720
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
8
79
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
526
229
2000
499
118
1251
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
526
229
2499
0
118
1251
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
6
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
50.0
5.0
64.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
57.0
14.0
71.0
Total Split (s)
30.0
18.0
77.0
18.0
95.0
Total Split (%)
24.0%
14.4%
61.6%
14.4%
76.0%
Maximum Green (s)
23.0
12.0
70.0
12.0
88.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 2 AM Peak 2045 No Build 8:40 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J.Coyle
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Min
None
C-Min
Act Effct Green (s)
22.0
40.0
72.0
11.0
89.0
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.18
0.32
0.58
0.09
0.71
v/c Ratio
0.90
0.47
0.91
0.77
0.54
Control Delay
69.8
36.0
18.9
86.0
9.6
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
69.8
36.0
18.9
86.0
9.6
LOS
E
D
B
F
A
Approach Delay
59.5
18.9
16.1
Approach LOS
E
B
B
Queue Length 50th (ft)
214
139
334
94
229
Queue Length 95th (ft)
#296
218
m246
#153
267
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
175
250
Base Capacity (vph)
610
498
2751
168
2335
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.86
0.46
0.91
0.70
0.54
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 85
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.91
Intersection Signal Delay: 24.7
Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0%
ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
Goldsborough Drive 2045 No-build
PM Synchro
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 4 PM Peak 2045 No Build 10:17 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J. Coyle
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
661
253
1405
479
246
1518
Future Volume (vph)
661
253
1405
479
246
1518
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
175
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Frt
0.850
0.960
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
3319
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
9
97
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
743
281
1579
577
300
1725
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
743
281
2156
0
300
1725
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
6
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
50.0
5.0
64.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
14.0
57.0
14.0
71.0
Total Split (s)
34.0
27.0
64.0
27.0
91.0
Total Split (%)
27.2%
21.6%
51.2%
21.6%
72.8%
Maximum Green (s)
27.0
21.0
57.0
21.0
84.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 4 PM Peak 2045 No Build 10:17 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J. Coyle
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Min
None
C-Min
Act Effct Green (s)
27.1
55.1
56.9
21.0
83.9
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.22
0.44
0.46
0.17
0.67
v/c Ratio
1.03
0.42
0.98
1.02
0.78
Control Delay
90.5
25.7
31.1
109.0
17.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
90.5
25.7
31.1
109.0
17.5
LOS
F
C
C
F
B
Approach Delay
72.7
31.1
31.1
Approach LOS
E
C
C
Queue Length 50th (ft)
~333
148
459
~257
465
Queue Length 95th (ft)
#448
225
m#605
#376
536
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
175
250
Base Capacity (vph)
718
666
2192
294
2205
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
1.03
0.42
0.98
1.02
0.78
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 105
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.03
Intersection Signal Delay: 39.3
Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.8%
ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
Synchro – Alternative 1 AM
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 5 AM Peak 2045 Build South Leg Crosswalk 11:03 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
468
206
1780
414
97
1101
Future Volume (vph)
468
206
1780
414
97
1101
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
175
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Ped Bike Factor
0.46
Frt
0.850
0.970
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4720
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
1530
1501
4720
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
2
63
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)
100
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
526
229
2000
499
118
1251
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
526
229
2499
0
118
1251
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
2
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
2
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
42.0
5.0
42.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
46.0
61.0
46.0
61.0
Total Split (s)
16.0
46.0
63.0
46.0
63.0
Total Split (%)
12.8%
36.8%
50.4%
36.8%
50.4%
Maximum Green (s)
9.0
40.0
56.0
40.0
56.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 5 AM Peak 2045 Build South Leg Crosswalk 11:03 am 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Max
None
C-Max
Walk Time (s)
7.0
7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
29.0
29.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
15
15
Act Effct Green (s)
9.0
36.7
75.3
20.7
75.3
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.07
0.29
0.60
0.17
0.60
v/c Ratio
2.21
0.52
0.87
0.41
0.63
Control Delay
584.7
38.8
18.4
47.5
20.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
584.7
38.8
18.4
47.5
20.5
LOS
F
D
B
D
C
Approach Delay
419.1
18.4
22.8
Approach LOS
F
B
C
Queue Length 50th (ft)
~352
166
259
93
270
Queue Length 95th (ft)
#458
193
m522
112
510
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
175
250
Base Capacity (vph)
238
673
2867
560
1976
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
2.21
0.34
0.87
0.21
0.63
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBSB, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 145
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 2.21
Intersection Signal Delay: 85.2
Intersection LOS: F
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0%
ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
Synchro – Alternative 1 PM
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 6 PM Peak 2045 South Leg Crosswalk 2:32 pm 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J. Coyle
Page 1
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
661
253
1405
479
246
1518
Future Volume (vph)
661
253
1405
479
246
1518
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width (ft)
11
11
12
14
12
12
Storage Length (ft)
175
0
25
250
Storage Lanes
1
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)
25
25
Lane Util. Factor
0.97
1.00
0.91
0.91
1.00
0.95
Ped Bike Factor
0.47
Frt
0.850
0.960
Flt Protected
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (prot)
3319
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Flt Permitted
0.950
0.950
Satd. Flow (perm)
1576
1501
4692
0
1752
3282
Right Turn on Red
Yes
Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
8
94
Link Speed (mph)
30
50
50
Link Distance (ft)
419
709
1035
Travel Time (s)
9.5
9.7
14.1
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)
100
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.90
0.89
0.83
0.82
0.88
Heavy Vehicles (%)
2%
4%
8%
1%
3%
10%
Adj. Flow (vph)
743
281
1579
577
300
1725
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
743
281
2156
0
300
1725
Enter Blocked Intersection
No
No
No
No
No
No
Lane Alignment
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Median Width(ft)
23
12
12
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)
16
16
16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor
1.04
1.04
1.00
0.92
1.00
1.00
Turning Speed (mph)
15
9
9
15
Turn Type
Prot
pm+ov
NA
Prot
NA
Protected Phases
8
1
2
1
2
Permitted Phases
8
Detector Phase
8
1
2
1
2
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
7.0
5.0
42.0
5.0
42.0
Minimum Split (s)
14.0
46.0
61.0
46.0
61.0
Total Split (s)
17.0
46.0
62.0
46.0
62.0
Total Split (%)
13.6%
36.8%
49.6%
36.8%
49.6%
Maximum Green (s)
10.0
40.0
55.0
40.0
55.0
Yellow Time (s)
4.0
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
All-Red Time (s)
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
09/06/2023
Scenario 6 PM Peak 2045 South Leg Crosswalk 2:32 pm 02/09/2023
Synchro 11 Report
J. Coyle
Page 2
Lane Group
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Recall Mode
None
None
C-Max
None
C-Max
Walk Time (s)
7.0
7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s)
29.0
29.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)
15
15
Act Effct Green (s)
10.0
44.6
67.4
27.6
67.4
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.08
0.36
0.54
0.22
0.54
v/c Ratio
2.80
0.52
0.84
0.78
0.98
Control Delay
843.2
33.3
17.6
58.8
45.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
843.2
33.3
17.6
58.8
45.5
LOS
F
C
B
E
D
Approach Delay
621.0
17.6
47.4
Approach LOS
F
B
D
Queue Length 50th (ft)
~528
177
226
234
666
Queue Length 95th (ft)
#644
233
m516
271
#943
Internal Link Dist (ft)
339
629
955
Turn Bay Length (ft)
175
250
Base Capacity (vph)
265
688
2571
560
1768
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio
2.80
0.41
0.84
0.54
0.98
Intersection Summary
Area Type:
Other
Cycle Length: 125
Actuated Cycle Length: 125
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBSB, Start of Yellow
Natural Cycle: 145
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 2.80
Intersection Signal Delay: 147.9
Intersection LOS: F
Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0%
ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
Splits and Phases: 1: Route 440 & Goldsborough Drive
Appendix K
Collision Diagram
204 |
2
4
6
12
7
10
5
14
17
20
23
24
28
31
32
33
34
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
PROSPECT AVE
E 32ND ST
LEFANTE WAY
1
12
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2019
1
3
3
3
8
9
13
11
15
16
18
19
21
22
26
27
29
30
25
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
GOLDSBOROUGH DR
OVERTURNED (MOTORCYCLE)
FIXED OBJECT
2
12
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2019
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
3
12
2019 COLLISION DIAGRAM DATA
NO.
TIME
DAY
DATE
NO.
INJURED
FATAL
SURFACE
CONDITION
WEATHER
LIGHT
CONDITION
LOCATION
1
2:58
MON
1/14/2019
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
200 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
2
7:20
THR
1/24/2019
1
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
80 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
3
13:32
TUE
1/29/2019
2
0
DRY
OVERCAST
DAYLIGHT
350 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
4
7:41
WED
2/28/2019
0
0
WET
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
125 FT. SOUTH OF E 32ND ST.
5
19:04
THR
3/21/2019
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
10 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
6
17:49
THR
4/11/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DUSK
150 FT. NORTH OF LEFANTE WAY
7
3:47
FRI
4/12/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
250 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
8
7:35
THR
4/25/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
100 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
9
8:49
WED
5/22/2091
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
30 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
10
15:34
WED
5/22/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
45 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
11
22:11
SAT
6/15/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
50 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
12
11:50
THR
6/20/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
13
14:49
SUN
7/14/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
14
23:13
TUE
7/18/2019
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
15 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
15
15:02
WED
7/31/2019
1
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
10 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
16
11:55
MON
8/5/2019
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
17
11:50
FRI
8/16/2019
2
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
15 FT. EAST OF LEFANTE WAY
18
8:51
THR
8/22/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
19
10:04
MON
9/16/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
20
13:42
WED
9/18/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
20 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
21
20:19
SUN
9/22/2019
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
25 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
22
12:28
SUN
10/6/2019
0
0
DRY
OVERCAST
DARK
100 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
23
23:11
MON
10/7/2019
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
24
21:44
FRI
10/25/2019
4
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
40 FT. EAST OF RT. 440 NB
25
14:27
SUN
11/10/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
300 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
26
18:00
SUN
10/10/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
40 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
27
16:38
SAT
11/23/2019
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
300 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
28
18:21
TUE
11/26/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
50 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
29
21:32
THR
12/5/2019
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
100 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
30
9:01
MON
12/9/2019
0
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
31
6:47
SAT
12/14/2019
0
0
WET
RAINY
DAWN
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
32
19:06
TUE
12/17/2019
0
0
WET
SNOWY
DARK
75 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
33
21:02
WED
12/18/2019
2
0
ICY
SNOWY
DARK
30 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
34
13:00
THR
12/19/2019
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
200 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2019
2
3
6
10
11
13
14
17
19
22
25
26
27
12
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
PROSPECT AVE
E 32ND ST
LEFANTE WAY
4
12
PEDESTRIAN
FIXED OBJECT
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
OPPOSITE DIRECTION SIDE
OPPOSITE HEAD-ON
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2020
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
1
4
5
7
8
9
15
16
18
20
21
23
24
28
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
GOLDSBOROUGH DR
5
12
FIXED OBJECT
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
LEFT/ U-TURN
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2020
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
6
12
2020 COLLISION DIAGRAM DATA
NO.
TIME
DAY
DATE
NO.
INJURED
FATAL
SURFACE
CONDITION
WEATHER
LIGHT
CONDITION
LOCATION
1
15:10
SUN
1/5/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
20 FT. WEST OF RT. 440 NB
2
13:32
SAT
1/18/2020
0
0
SLUSHY
SNOWY
DAYLIGHT
20 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
3
13:49
MON
1/27/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. EAST ON E. 32ND ST.
4
16:15
THR
1/30/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
5
20:56
SAT
2/1/2020
2
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
300 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
6
14:58
FRI
2/7/2020
1
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E 32ND ST.
7
18:54
TUE
2/18/2020
2
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
8
10:05
MON
2/24/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
20 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
9
20:49
THR
3/12/2020
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
10
22:42
FRI
3/13/2020
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
11
13:50
SUN
3/29/2020
0
0
WET
OVERCAST
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
12
11:43
SAT
5/16/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
10 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
13
14:42
THR
6/4/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
14
12:44
FRI
6/26/2020
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
15
17:33
SAT
6/27/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
100 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
16
N/A
THR
8/20/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
17
16:49
SAT
8/22/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
18
12:21
FRI
8/28/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
19
21:21
SUN
8/30/2020
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
50 FT. SOUTH OF E. 32ND ST.
20
11:01
WED
9/2/2020
0
0
WET
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
10 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
21
12:15
MON
9/14/2020
2
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
22
13:24
THR
10/1/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
200 FT. NORTH OF LEFANTE WAY
23
13:03
MON
10/12/2020
0
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
24
18:06
MON
10/19/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
200 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
25
3:23
SUN
10/25/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
26
12:08
THR
11/5/2020
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
27
20:52
FRI
11/27/2020
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
28
21:12
TUE
12/15/2020
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2020
1
4
5
9
10
13
15
16
18
19
20
22
24
25
26
29
30
31
36
37
38
39
40
41
45
23
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
PROSPECT AVE
E 32ND ST
LEFANTE WAY
7
12
FIXED OBJECT
OVERTURNED (MOTORCYCLE)
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
OPPOSITE HEAD-ON
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2021
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
2
3
6
7
8
11
12
14
21
27
28
32
33
34
35
42
43
44
17
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
GOLDSBOROUGH DR
LEGEND
8
12
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
OPPOSITE HEAD-ON
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2021
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
9
12
2021 COLLISION DIAGRAM DATA
NO.
TIME
DAY
DATE
NO.
INJURED
FATAL
SURFACE
CONDITION
WEATHER
LIGHT
CONDITION
LOCATION
1
22:09
TUE
1/19/2021
3
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
2
17:38
WED
1/20/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
150 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
3
16:49
SAT
1/23/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DUSK
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
4
17:15
MON
1/25/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
5
18:16
THR
1/28/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
25 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
6
8:20
MON
2/1/2021
0
0
SNOWY
SNOW
DAYLIGHT
150 SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
7
13:11
THR
2/11/2021
0
0
WET
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
500 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
8
12:59
SAT
2/13/2021
2
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. NORTH GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
9
6:18
THR
2/18/2021
0
0
SNOWY
SNOW
DAWN
100 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
10
14:32
FRI
3/12/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
10 FT. SOUTH OF E. 32ND ST.
11
22:09
SUN
3/14/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
12
19:21
WED
3/17/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
13
15:12
FRI
3/19/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
14
17:13
SUN
3/21/2021
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
100 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
15
19:38
MON
3/22/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
100 FT. NORTH OF LEFANTE WAY
16
18:06
TUE
4/6/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
17
3:31
SAT
4/24/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
500 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
18
16:58
WED
5/12/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
19
8:33
SUN
5/30/2021
0
0
WET
RAINY
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
20
20:49
SUN
5/30/2021
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
21
15:32
WED
6/2/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
300 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
22
21:06
TUE
6/24/2021
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
23
17:49
TUE
7/13/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
24
21:31
SUN
7/18/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
25 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
25
13:37
WED
7/28/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
26
19:57
FRI
7/30/2021
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
15 FT. WEST OF LEFANTE WAY
27
15:26
THR
8/5/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
100 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
28
18:52
FRI
8/6/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. NORTH GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
29
15:53
FRI
8/20/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
30
21:13
MON
8/23/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
31
21:16
THR
9/23/2021
0
0
WET
RAINY
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
32
16:36
THR
10/21/2021
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
100 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
33
16:58
FRI
10/29/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
400 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
34
17:15
SAT
10/30/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
30 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
35
6:45
THR
11/4/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
150 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
36
17:37
THR
11/11/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
200 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
37
12:04
SAT
11/13/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
200 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
38
13:16
SAT
11/13/2021
0
0
DRY
OVERCAST
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. EAST OF E. 32ND ST.
39
12:59
TUE
11/16/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & E. 32ND ST.
40
7:48
WED
11/17/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
75 FT. SOUTH OF E. 32ND ST.
41
12:31
SAT
11/20/2021
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. WEST OF LEFANTE WAY
42
13:25
THR
11/25/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
43
10:57
SAT
12/4/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
25 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
44
14:54
MON
12/6/2021
0
0
WET
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
150 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
45
18:37
TUE
12/14/2021
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 & LEFANTE WAY
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2021
1
12
14
4
7
16
17
15
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
PROSPECT AVE
E 32ND ST
LEFANTE WAY
10
12
LEGEND
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2022
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
2
3
5
6
8
9
10
11
13
18
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
ROUTE 440 SB
ROUTE 440 NB
GOLDSBOROUGH DR
LEGEND
11
12
FIXED OBJECT
SYMBOL
COLLISION TYPE
SAME DIRECTION-REAR
SAME DIRECTION SIDE
PERPENDICULAR
BACKING
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2022
CITY OF BAYONNE
COUNTY OF HUDSON
BAYONNE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
12
12
2022 COLLISION DIAGRAM DATA
NO.
TIME
DAY
DATE
NO.
INJURED
FATAL
SURFACE
CONDITION
WEATHER
LIGHT
CONDITION
LOCATION
1
18:33
MON
1/10/2022
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
20 FT. SOUTH OF LEFANTE WAY
2
17:53
TUE
1/11/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
30 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
3
17:00
WED
1/12/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DUSK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
4
12:50
THR
1/13/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND E. 32ND ST.
5
13:01
WED
1/19/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
75 FT. NORTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
6
N/A
THR
1/27/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
100 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
7
7:38
THR
2/10/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
20 FT. NORTH OF E. 32ND ST.
8
11:12
TUE
2/15/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
9
17:55
SAT
3/26/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
10 FT. SOUTH OF GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
10
16:34
FRI
4/1/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
11
18:47
TUE
4/5/2022
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DUSK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
12
14:45
SUN
5/22/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND LEFANTE WAY
13
18:18
SAT
8/18/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
60 FT. EAST OF RT. 440
14
12:10
THR
7/7/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAYLIGHT
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND LEFANTE WAY
15
21:06
SAT
7/16/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
5 FT. WEST OF RT. 440
16
15:25
MON
7/25/2022
0
0
WET
OVERCAST
DAYLIGHT
50 FT. NORTH OF LEFANTE WAY
17
5:52
TUE
1/20/2022
1
0
DRY
CLEAR
DAWN
50 FT. WEST OF LEFANTE WAY
18
20:54
SUN
8/7/2022
0
0
DRY
CLEAR
DARK
AT INTERSECTION OF RT. 440 AND GOLDSBOROUGH DR.
COLLISION
DIAGRAM
2022
Appendix L
Environmental Screening and
Constraint Map
217 |
ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING REPORT
for
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT STUDY
PEDESTRAIN BRIDGE OVER STATE ROUTE 440 BETWEEN THE 34TH
STREET LRT STATION AND THE PENINSULA AT BAYONNE HARBOR
(PABH)
Located in:
City of Bayonne
Hudson County, New Jersey
Prepared for:
Prepared By:
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
Subconsultant:
Shelbourne at Hunterdon
53 Frontage Road, Suite 179
Hampton NJ 08827
Phone: (908) 537-1300
August 10, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
Introduction ...........................................................................................................1
II.
Cultural Resources (Archeological and Historic Architecture) .................................1
III.
Section 4(f) Properties ............................................................................................2
IV.
Air/Noise ...............................................................................................................2
V.
Ecology ..................................................................................................................3
A. Land Use .....................................................................................................3
B. Wetlands ....................................................................................................3
C. Streams/Flood Plains/Riparian Zones ..........................................................3
D. Sole Source Aquifers ...................................................................................4
E. Wildlife Habitat ...........................................................................................4
F. Threatened and/or Endangered Species (NJDEP and USFWS) .......................4
VI.
Landscape Architecture ..........................................................................................4
VII.
Socioeconomics/Environmental Justice ..................................................................5
VIII.
Hazardous Waste ...................................................................................................6
IX.
Potential Environmental Permits/Approvals and
Interagency Coordination .......................................................................................8
X.
References .............................................................................................................9
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Maps
1. USGS Topographic Map
2. Site Location Map
3. Hazardous Materials Map
4. Environmental Constraints Map
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Appendix C – Agency Correspondence
1
I.
Introduction
The proposed project is to construct a pedestrian bridge over Route 440, between the 34th Street
LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH). The proposed bridge will reconnect the
residential community on the west side of Route 440 with the redevelopment of the PABH which
includes: restaurants, retail, residential areas, and future planned parks. The bridge will provide
safe passage for the public over the busy 4- lane highway.
For this report, the study area consists of the project limits and associated 300-foot buffer.
Environmental constraints have been identified within the Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over Route
440, between the 34th Street LRT Station and the PABH project limits in accordance with the
Scope of Work. This document was prepared by utilizing federal, state, and municipal online
databases and performing one site visit. The site visit was conducted on October 25, 2022, to
verify the accuracy of the online data. This report summarizes the environmental constraints and
provides a constraints plan. The findings of this effort are discussed below.
II.
Cultural Resources (Archeological and Historic Architecture)
A review of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) GeoWeb Database
and the NJ State Historic Preservation Office’s (NJHPO) online review of New Jersey and National
Registers of Historic Places concluded that no National and six (6) State historic resources are
located within the study area. All the existing historic resources are residential structures.
Goldsboro Village Buildings Number 251A-254A has been demolished and has been replaced by
Costco Wholesale big box store. The project does not include involvement with any existing
bridges or culverts over 50 years old. The study area is not located within an archaeological grid.
No undisturbed areas, old foundations, or building rubble were observed in the study area. There
are no historic districts within the vicinity of the project. The residential properties
(approximately 170) in the study area are 50+ year old structures. As the project is federally
funded, Section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 with
NJHPO is required.
Table 1-New Jersey Historic Resources
Site Name
Address
Designation Status
Goldsboro Village Buildings Number
251A-254A
(Demolished)
State Highway 440
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
Identified individual
250 Prospect Avenue
250 Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 411, Lot 19)
Identified Individual
260 Prospect Avenue
260 Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 411, Lot 14)
Identified Individual
452-456 Avenue E
452-456 Avenue E
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Identified Individual
2
(Block 409, Lot 16, 16.11
– 16.18, 17)
573 Avenue E
573 Avenue E
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 121, Lot 20)
Identified Individual
585-587 Avenue E
587 Avenue E
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 121, Lot 6)
Identified Individual
III. Section 4(f) Properties
A review of available data from the NJDEP Green Acres Program and aerial photograph
interpretation was performed to identify recreational and open space resources. A review of the
Green Acres Program Recreational and Open Space Inventory (ROSI) concluded that no Green
Acres encumbered properties are located within the study area.
As discussed in Section II, there are no historic bridges within the study area; however,
approximately 170 residences are 50+ years old. If these properties are determined to be eligible
and a use of these properties is required, Section 4(f) evaluation may be necessary.
The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway is a pathway on the western shore of the Hudson River
in New Jersey. Codified in the New Jersey Coastal Management Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:7E), New Jersey
planned the Walkway to exist immediately adjacent to the river in a continuously connected 30-
foot-wide path from the tip of Bayonne to the George Washington Bridge. The Walkway provides
free access 24/7 for the enjoyment of the public. Portions of the Walkway traverse the study area
from the South Cove Commons on Lefante Way northward past the Lidl Food Market located off
Goldsborough Drive. Access points to the walkway are located at Lefante Way & Route 440 and
Port Terminal Boulevard and Route 440 and should remain open during construction.
IV.
Air/Noise
As per the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the study area is in a non-attainment
area for 8-hour ozone and in a maintenance area for CO. Additionally, the study area is in an
attainment area for both PM-2.5 and PM-10. The proposed project type is listed in Table 2 of the
USEPA Transportation Conformity Rule; therefore, the project is exempt from the Clean Air Act
Amendments (CAAA) and an air quality study is not required. Also, the project would be
considered a “Type III” project as defined in the FHWA Procedures for Abatement of Highway
Traffic Noise and Construction Noise and will not require noise analysis. Best management
practices for air and noise pollution controls will need to be employed due to the proximity to
sensitive receptors (residential properties, historic resources, medical office, restaurants, etc.).
3
V. Ecology
A. Land Use
The study area is in an urban landscape within the City of Bayonne. The study area is
located within four zoning districts, the BMHO – Bayonne Metropolitan Harbor
District, bounded on the west by Route 440 and the south by South Cove, the H-C –
Highway Commercial/Selected Light Industrial District, bounded on the west by Route
440 and the north by South Cove , TDD – Transit Development District, bounded on
the east by Route 440, and R-2 – Detached/Attached Residential District, bounded on
the east by Route 440 and on the north by the TDD district.
Within the study area, the east side of the highway (Zones BMHO and H-C) has been
developed as commercial/retail, e.g., Costco Wholesale, CVS Pharmacy, Lidl Market,
Dunkin Donuts. The west side of the highway (Zone TDD) has been developed as a
transportation railroad corridor, including the NJ Transit 34th Street LRT Station and
residential. Southwest of the Route 440/Lefante Way intersection, the area is
residential.
B. Wetlands
A review of NJDEP’s online database and the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map
was conducted to ascertain the presence/absence of wetlands within the study area.
The review concluded that estuarine and marine wetlands associated with the Hudson
River/Upper New York Harbor estuary is located within the study area. A field visit
also confirmed the presence of emergent wetlands associated with a drainage ditch
located adjacent to Route 440 NB, in the vicinity of Costco. An artificial pond/basin
containing goldfish (Carassius ssp.) is located at the 34th Street LRT Station adjacent
to Route 440. Wetlands located within the study area are regulated as Freshwater
Wetlands as per N.J.A.C. 7:7A and are subject to a 50-foot transition area. No impacts
to wetlands, transition area, and/or open waters are anticipated. In New Jersey, the
USACE also regulates the filling and dredging of wetlands located within 1,000 feet of
the mean high-water line of a tidal waterway. As such, any work proposed within
wetlands or waters located within 1,000 feet of the mean high-water line of the
Hudson River/Upper New York Harbor estuary will be regulated by the USACE.
C. Streams/Floodplains/Riparian Zones
The Hudson River/Upper New York Harbor estuary is classified by the Surface Water
Quality Standards (N.J.A.C. 7:9) as SE2. Based on the attributes of the water, a 50 feet
riparian zone is likely. The drainage ditch located in the vicinity of Costco appears to
be concrete lined as per a review of as-built plans. As such, the drainage ditch does
not have a riparian zone. Portions of the study area are located within the Preliminary
FEMA Flood Zone X and Zone AE (EL 13). In the existing condition, areas located east
of Route 440 are within the regulated flood zone. The foundation of the stair tower
to the pedestrian overpass/bridge is likely in the flood hazard area and will require a
4
permit under the NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Control Act Rules (N.J.A.C 7:13). No
impacts to the regulated water itself or riparian zone are anticipated.
The City of Bayonne has a NJDEP Waterfront Development Master Permit for the
redevelopment of the waterfront within the study area. It is unknown if the proposed
project is included in the Master Permit or if the permit can be modified to include it.
A review of NJDEP geospatial data indicates that tidelands claims are present in the
study area. Tidelands claims are areas that are currently or formerly flowed by tidal
waterbodies. It is assumed that a tidelands instrument currently exists for the
roadway within the study area.
D. Sole Source Aquifers
The study area is not located within a sole source aquifer.
E. Wildlife Habitat
The proposed activities are located within the existing transportation corridor or areas
under intensive vegetation management. Impacts to wildlife habitat within the study
area are de minimis.
F. Threatened and/or Endangered Species (NJDEP and USFWS)
A review of NJDEP’s online database was conducted to ascertain the
presence/absence of threatened or endangered species within the study area. The
review concluded that the following threatened, endangered, or species of special
concern and/or habitat are potentially located in the vicinity of the study area: black-
crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea),
tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor), glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), snowy egret
(Egretta thula), cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus), Savanah
sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum),
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus).
A review of the USFWS’s IPac database was conducted to ascertain the
presence/absence of threatened, endangered, or candidate species potentially
located within the study area. The results concluded that although there are no critical
habitats located within the study area, the following threatened, endangered, or
candidate species should be considered in an effects analysis for the project in
consultation with USFWS: tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) and monarch butterfly
(Danaus plexippus).
Within the study area, the proposed activities are located within the existing
transportation corridor or areas under intensive vegetation management.
Disturbance to wetlands, open waters, vernal pools, riparian zones, or forested areas
is not anticipated. Trees located within the study area are stand-alone specimens.
Minor tree trimming or removal of stand-alone trees is not anticipated.
5
Due to the development of the transportation corridor, the nature of the proposed
improvements, and the lack of suitable habitat for any of the species in the corridor,
no impacts to threatened or endangered species are anticipated. To protect the
federally listed tricolored bat, a timing restriction of April 1st to November 15th for tree
clearing is anticipated.
VI.
Landscape Architecture
Tree coverage within the study area consists of individual stand-alone trees located along the NJ
Transit railroad right-of-way and on residential properties. Additional tree plantings are located
within the NJ Transit 34th Street HBLR Station complex. Built environments that are primarily
impervious surface but have canopy due to engineered planting are not deemed forested areas.
No impacts to forested areas are anticipated. In addition, as the City of Bayonne is not a state
agency, a reforestation plan under the No Net Loss Reforestation Act is not applicable. Turf
establishment and standard soil erosion and sediment control measures will be incorporated into
the project. Aesthetic landscaping area enhancements may be necessary.
VII.
Socioeconomics/Environmental Justice
The 2020 U.S. Census data indicated that the population within Bayonne is comprised of 38.3%
minorities (statewide average 46.5%) and that 12.4% of the population lives below the poverty
line (statewide average 10.2%). 14.8% of the population are over the age of 65 (statewide
average 16.9%).
Community facilities within the study area include public transportation facilities, grocery stores,
and medical facilities. No farmland, playgrounds, parks, or gardens exist within the study area.
Table 2-Community Facilities
Site Name
Location
34th Street HBLR Station
34th Street & Avenue E
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 504, Lot 3)
34th Street HBLR Station Pedestrian Bridge &
Stop, Park & Ride – West Side
RT 440/34th Street (Prospect Avenue)
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 407, Lots 1-3; Block 504, Lot 3, 4)
34th Street Station Stop, Park & Ride – East
Side
276 Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 408, Lot 1)
Bus Stop RT 440/34th Street HBLR Station
Loop
RT 440/34th Street (Prospect Avenue)
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 407, Lot 1)
CVS Pharmacy
18-40 Goldsborough Drive
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
6
Lidl Food Market
21 Goldsborough Drive
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
Urquhart Orthopedic Associates
534 Avenue E, Suite 1B, Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 406, Lots 29, 30)
Hudson River Waterfront Walkway
South Cove Commons on Lefante Way
northward to Lindl Food Market on
Goldsborough Drive, Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1; Block 412, Lot 1.01)
The project does not propose displacement of businesses or residences and there are no
observable safety issues or concerns in the study area other than those to be addressed as part
of this project (pedestrian bridge). The project may temporarily affect traffic patterns on Route
440 and access at the existing pedestrian overpass to the 34th Street HBLR station during
construction. The project does not have potential for Environmental Justice involvement.
The project’s potential impacts include:
• Detour or other traffic impacts affecting Route 440.
• Detours or other traffic impacts affecting Goldsborough Drive.
• Detour or other traffic impacts affecting access to CVS Pharmacy located off
Goldsborough Drive.
• Access to the existing pedestrian overpass to the 34th Street HBLR station.
The project will not have disproportionately high or adverse effects on low income and/or
minority communities.
VIII.
Hazardous Waste
A review of NJDEP’s online database and the EDR Radius Map™ Report was conducted to
ascertain the extent of existing environmental contamination within the study area. This review
was not intended to replace a Hazardous Waste Technical Environmental Study. The following
databases were reviewed and the results of each search follow in the corresponding tables:
• NJDEP GeoWeb NJEMS Sites in New Jersey as of October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Site Remediation Program List of Known Contaminated Sites as of
October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb New Jersey Ground Water Classification Exception Area (CEA) as of
October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Currently Known Extent of Groundwater Contamination (CKE) as of
October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Historic Fill of New Jersey as of October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Deed Notice Areas as of October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Underground Storage Tank Facilities as of October 2022.
• NJDEP GeoWeb Brownfields as of October 2022.
7
• New Jersey’s Online Searchable Database for Brownfield Properties as of October 2022.
•
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®
The review concluded that there are documented hazardous waste sites, groundwater
contamination areas, deed notice areas, underground storage tank facilities, or brown fields
located within the study area. Ten regulated sites are in the vicinity of the study area and are
summarized in the table below. Please note that as per NJDEP records, certain sites have multiple
entries and or names. Documented historic fill is located within the study area. Historic fill is
located east of Route 440, on both the north and south bank of South Cove, at the current
location of the Harbor Pointe Market Place (Costco, etc.) and the South Cove Commons. A site
visit was conducted on October 25, 2022, during which the presence of NJ Transit HBLR tracks,
located adjacent to the western boundary of the study area; a single active gas station, Costco
Gasoline #1334, located at 21 Goldsborough Drive (Block 404, Lot 1); and a groundwater
monitoring well located at the NJ Transit 34th Street HBLR Station parking lot, located at RT
440/34th Street (Prospect Avenue) (Block 407, Lot 1) were confirmed.
Table 3-New Jersey NJEMS Sites List
NJEMS Site
ID/Preferred
ID
Sites/Facilities
Site Name
Address/Block & Lot
NJEMS
49,349
Underground
Storage Tank
Bayonne Bus Garage
77 E. 32nd Street
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 408, Lot 1)
NJEMS
54,737
Underground
Storage Tank
Hicor Associates
276 Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 408, Lot 1)
NJEMS
61,5473
Underground
Storage Tank
Costco Gasoline #1334
21 Goldsborough Drive
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
NJEMS
38,667
Known
Contaminated Site
Bayonne Nipple Company
32nd Street E
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 407, Lot 1)
PI 011,992
Deed Notice Area
Military Ocean Terminal
(Block 404, Lot 1)
PI 766,201
Deed Notice Area
NJ Light Rail Transit
(Block 407, Lots 1, 3)
(Block 408, Lot 1)
(Block 504, Lot 3)
PI 011,992
CEA Groundwater
Contamination Area
Military Ocean Terminal -
Bayonne
Foot of 32nd Street
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
NJEMS
621,256
--
Harbor Pointe Market Place
18-40 Goldsborough
Drive
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 404, Lot 1)
8
NJEMS
38,667
--
34th Street Station Stop, Park
& Ride – West Side
Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 407, Lot 1)
NJEMS
54,737
--
34th Street Station Stop, Park
& Ride – East Side
276 Prospect Avenue
Bayonne, NJ 07002
(Block 408, Lot 1)
The project proposes excavation within a groundwater contamination area and in the deed notice
extent. The City of Bayonne has an ongoing remediation plan and permits for this area with NJDEP.
Further hazardous waste investigation to confirm this should be performed prior to excavation
and/or right-of-way acquisition.
IX.
Potential Environmental Permits/Approvals and Interagency Coordination
The project is considered a federal action and is subject to review per the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. In addition to NEPA, the following federal authorizations or permits
may be required for the project:
• Consultation with the NJHPO per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966.
• Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the USFWS
The following is a list of State Permits/Approvals/Coordination which may be required for the
project:
•
NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Control Act Rules Permit-by-rule 9 for work within the tidal flood
hazard area.
•
NJDEP Upland Waterfront Development Individual Permit for work above the MHWL if not
covered under the City’s Master Permit.
• Hudson Essex Passaic Soil Conservation District Certification.
• Compliance with the NJDEP Technical Requirements for Site Remediation and LSRP
Program for potential involvement with historic fill or regulated material.
9
X.
References
Brownfields Site Mart. State of New Jersey, n.d. Web. 26 October 2022.
<http://www.njbrownfieldsproperties.com/>.
Certified Sanborn® Map Report, Pedestrian Bridge Over Rte. 440 Between The 34th St
LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, EDR®, October 24, 2022.
City of Bayonne, Division of Parks. n.d. Web. 20 October 2022.
<https://www.bayonnenj.org/Departments/division-of-parks>.
EDR Historical Topo Map Report, Pedestrian Bridge Over Rte. 440 Between The 34th St
LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, EDR®, October 21, 2022.
FEMA FIRM #34017C0111D, effective 8/16/2006. FEMA Map Service Center. FEMA, n.d.
Web. 20 October 2022. <https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps>.
Hudson County Parks, Hudson County. n.d. Web. 20 October 2022.
<https://hudson-county-parks-hudsoncogis.hub.arcgis.com>.
NJDEP Bureau of Geographic Information Systems. State of New Jersey, 1996- 2022.
Web. 26 October 2022. <http://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html.>
NJDEP Green Acres Program. Recreation and Open Space Inventory (ROSI), State of New
Jersey, 1996-2022. Web. 23 October 2022. <https://dep.nj.gov/otpla/rosi/>.
NJDEP Historic Preservation Office LUCY CRGIS Online Viewer. State of New Jersey, 2022.
Web. 22 October 2022.
<https://njdep.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=44ce3eb3c533496
39040fe205d69bb79>.
NJDEP Historic Preservation Office New Jersey and National Registers of Historic Places.
State of New Jersey, n.d. Web. 19 October 2022.
<http://www.nj.gov/dep/hpo/1identify/nrsr_lists/Hudson.pdf>.
NJDEP National Ambient Air Quality Standards Overview. State of New Jersey, n.d. Web.
26 October 2022. <https://dep.nj.gov/airplanning/naaqs-and-attainment-area-status/>.
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package, Pedestrian Bridge Over Rte. 440 Between The
34th St LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, EDR®, October 21, 2022.
The EDR-City Directory Image Report, Pedestrian Bridge Over Rte. 440 Between The 34th
St LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, EDR®, October 21, 2022.
10
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®, Pedestrian Bridge Over Rte. 440
Between The 34th St LRT Station and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor, EDR®, October
21, 2022.
Transportation Conformity Regulations as of January 2022; Exempt Projects. 40 C.F.R.
Sec. 93.126. 2018. Print.
USFWS National Wetland Inventory. US Fish & Wildlife Service, 2022. Web. 20 October
2022. <https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/>.
Zoning Map, City of Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey, September 2020., CME
Associates.
APPENDIX A
Maps
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
³
Legend
Study Limits
Concept Development Study
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Between the 34th Street LRT Station and
The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH)
City of Bayonne, New Jersey
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
2,000
0
2,000
1,000
Feet
Ave E
State Hwy 440
E 32nd St
Broadway
Prospect Ave
E 34th St
E 35th St
E 36th St
E 33rd St
Goldsborough Dr
E 37th St
Port Terminal Blvd
Willow St
Lefante Way
Cross Ln
Chosin Few Way
W 35th St
E 31st St
W 36th St
W 34th St
State Hwy 440
³
Legend
Study Limits
Tax Parcels
Concept Development Study
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Between the 34th Street LRT Station and
The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH)
City of Bayonne, New Jersey
PROJECT STUDY LIMITS
300
0
300
150
Feet
Goldsboro Village, Buildings Number 251 A - 254 A
³
Legend
Study Limits
300 FT Buffer Study Limits
State, Local and Nonprofit Open Space of NJ
Municipal
Historic Properties of NJ
Listed INDV
Eligible INDV
Identified INDV
Wetlands of NJ
SALINE MARSH (LOW MARSH)
Landscape Data for Piedmont Plains of NJ
Rank 1 - Habitat specific requirements
Rank 3 - State Threatened
Rank 5 - Federal Listed
Concept Development Study
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Between the 34th Street LRT Station and
The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH)
City of Bayonne, New Jersey
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS MAP
500
0
500
250
Feet
³
Legend
Study Limits
300 FT Buffer Study Limits
Deed Notice Extent in New Jersey
Classification Exception Areas-Well Restriction Areas in NJ
Historic Fill
Underground Storage Tank Facilities in NJ
Effective
Expired
Terminated
Inspection Conducted
Concept Development Study
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Between the 34th Street LRT Station and
The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH)
City of Bayonne, New Jersey
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MAP
500
0
500
250
Feet
APPENDIX B
Site Photographs
Photo-1: Route 440/ Goldsborough Drive intersection. View facing west. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-2: Route 440/ Goldsborough Drive intersection. View facing north. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-3: Route 440/ Goldsborough Drive intersection. View facing south. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-4: Proposed bridge location at Block 404 Lot 1 (front of CVS Pharmacy).
View facing south. Photo taken 10/25/22.
Photo-5: Proposed bridge location at 34th St. LRT Station. View facing west. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-6: 34th St. LRT Station. View facing west. Photo taken 10/25/22.
Photo-7: Route 440/ Goldsborough Drive intersection. View facing north. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-8: Wetland area adjacent to Route 440 EB. View from facing north. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-9: South Cove Estuarine wetlands. Route 440 in background. View facing
south. Photo taken 10/25/22.
Photo-10: Hudson River Waterfront Walkway at Port Terminal Road. View facing
east. Photo taken 10/25/22.
Photo-11: Hudson River Waterfront Walkway at South Cove Commons/Lefante
Way. View facing east. Photo taken 10/25/22.
Photo-12: Route 440/Port Terminal Road intersection. View facing west. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-13: Route 440/Port Terminal Road intersection. View facing north. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-14: Route 440/32nd St./Lefante Way intersection. View facing south. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-15: Route 440/32nd St./Lefante Way intersection. View facing north. Photo
taken 10/25/22.
Photo-16: Route 440/32nd St./Lefante Way intersection. View facing west on
Lefante Way. Photo taken 10/25/22.
APPENDIX C
Agency Correspondence
▪
▪
▪
October 17, 2022
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
New Jersey Ecological Services Field Office
4 E. Jimmie Leeds Road, Suite 4
Galloway, NJ 08205
Phone: (609) 646-9310 Fax: (609) 646-0352
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2023-0005038
Project Name: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
If the enclosed list indicates that any listed species may be present in your action area, please
visit the New Jersey Field Office consultation web page as the next step in evaluating potential
project impacts: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/njfieldoffice/Endangered/consultation.html
On the New Jersey Field Office consultation web page you will find:
habitat descriptions, survey protocols, and recommended best management practices for
listed species;
recommended procedures for submitting information to this office; and
links to other Federal and State agencies, the Section 7 Consultation Handbook, the
Service’s wind energy guidelines, communication tower recommendations, the National
Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, and other resources and recommendations for
protecting wildlife resources.
The enclosed list may change as new information about listed species becomes available. As per
Federal regulations at 50 CFR 402.12(e), the enclosed list is only valid for 90 days. Please return
to the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation to
obtain an updated species list. When using ECOS-IPaC, be careful about drawing the boundary
of your Project Location. Remember that your action area under the ESA is not limited to just the
footprint of the project. The action area also includes all areas that may be indirectly
affected through impacts such as noise, visual disturbance, erosion, sedimentation, hydrologic
10/17/2022
2
▪
▪
▪
▪
change, chemical exposure, reduced availability or access to food resources, barriers to
movement, increased human intrusions or access, and all areas affected by reasonably forseeable
future that would not occur without ("but for") the project that is currently being proposed.
Additionally, please note that on March 23, 2022, the Service published a proposal to reclassify
the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia has ordered the Service to complete a new final listing
determination for the NLEB by November 2022 (Case 1:15-cv-00477, March 1, 2021). The bat,
currently listed as threatened, faces extinction due to the range-wide impacts of white-nose
syndrome (WNS), a deadly fungal disease affecting cave-dwelling bats across the continent. The
proposed reclassification, if finalized, would remove the current 4(d) rule for the NLEB, as these
rules may be applied only to threatened species. Depending on the type of effects a project has on
NLEB, the change in the species’ status may trigger the need to re-initiate consultation for any
actions that are not completed and for which the Federal action agency retains discretion once the
new listing determination becomes effective (anticipated to occur by December 30, 2022). If
your project may result in incidental take of NLEB after the new listing goes into effect this will
first need to addressed in an updated consultation that includes an Incidental Take Statement. If
your project may require re-initiation of consultation, please contact our office for additional
guidance.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal and non-Federal project proponents to consider listed, proposed, and candidate species
early in the planning process. Feel free to contact this office if you would like more information
or assistance evaluating potential project impacts to federally listed species or other wildlife
resources. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any
correspondence about your project.
Attachment(s):
Official Species List
USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
Migratory Birds
Wetlands
10/17/2022
1
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
New Jersey Ecological Services Field Office
4 E. Jimmie Leeds Road, Suite 4
Galloway, NJ 08205
(609) 646-9310
10/17/2022
2
Project Summary
Project Code:
2023-0005038
Project Name:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Project Type:
Road/Hwy - Maintenance/Modification
Project Description: Construction of a pedestrian bridge over State Highway 440 between the
existing 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail (HBLRT) station and the
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH).
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/@40.6712179,-74.10588766292466,14z
Counties: Hudson County, New Jersey
10/17/2022
3
1.
▪
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 2 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species. Note that 1 of these species should be
considered only under certain conditions.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME
STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
Proposed
Endangered
Insects
NAME
STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions:
The monarch is a candidate species and not yet listed or proposed for listing. There are
generally no section 7 requirements for candidate species (FAQ found here: https://
www.fws.gov/savethemonarch/FAQ-Section7.html).
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
1
10/17/2022
1
USFWS National Wildlife Refuge Lands And Fish
Hatcheries
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
10/17/2022
1
1.
2.
3.
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds Sep 1 to
Jul 31
Black Scoter Melanitta nigra
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
1
2
10/17/2022
2
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Breeds May 15
to Oct 10
Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalis
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds Jan 15
to Sep 30
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds Mar 15
to Aug 25
Common Loon gavia immer
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4464
Breeds Apr 15
to Oct 31
Eastern Whip-poor-will Antrostomus vociferus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 1
to Aug 20
Great Shearwater Puffinus gravis
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
King Rail Rallus elegans
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8936
Breeds May 1
to Sep 5
Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7238
Breeds
elsewhere
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 1
to Jul 31
10/17/2022
3
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 10
to Sep 10
Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
Royal Tern Thalasseus maximus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds Apr 15
to Aug 31
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds
elsewhere
Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds
elsewhere
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 10
to Aug 31
Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
10/17/2022
4
1.
2.
3.
no data
survey effort
breeding season
probability of presence
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
10/17/2022
5
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Black Scoter
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Black-billed
Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Black-legged
Kittiwake
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Brown Pelican
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Common Loon
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Eastern Whip-poor-
will
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Great Shearwater
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
King Rail
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Long-tailed Duck
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
SPECIES
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
Red-breasted
Merganser
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
10/17/2022
6
▪
▪
▪
Red-throated Loon
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Ring-billed Gull
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Royal Tern
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Rusty Blackbird
BCC - BCR
Surf Scoter
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
White-winged
Scoter
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits
may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my
specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
10/17/2022
7
1.
2.
3.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information
Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look
at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each
bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated
with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point
within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not
breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
"BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
"BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
"Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
10/17/2022
8
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
10/17/2022
1
▪
Wetlands
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
ESTUARINE AND MARINE WETLAND
Estuarine
10/17/2022
2
IPaC User Contact Information
Agency:
Malick & Scherer, P.C.
Name:
John Boyce
Address:
Shelbourne at Hunterdon
Address Line 2: 53 Frontage Road, Suite 170
City:
Hampton
State:
NJ
Zip:
08827
Email
jboyce@malickandscherer.com
Phone:
9085371326
Appendix M
Conceptual Alignments, ROW Impacts,
Environmental Constraints, Bridge
Staging, Profile, and Local Detour
261 |
General Plan, Elevations, and Sections
Construction Staging Plans
Preliminary Detour Routes
Goldsborough Drive
Rt. 440
Avenue E
Rt. 440
N
Project Location
Weekend Overnight
Closure of Rt. 440
Costco
34th St. HBLR Station
CVS
E Centre St.
E 30th St.
Avenue E
Chosin Few Way
Rt. 440
Detour Route for Weekend Overnight Closure
of Rt. 440 for Bridge Construction
Port Terminal Blvd.
Rt. 440 NB Detour
Goldsborough Dr. to
Rt. 440 SB Detour
Rt. 440 SB Detour
Legend
Starbucks
Lidl
Rt. 440
N
Project Location
Weekend Overnight
Closure of Rt. 440
Detour Route for Rt. 440 SB Through Traffic
on Weekend Overnight Closure of Rt. 440 for Bridge Construction
Rt. 440
Bayonne Bridge
Rt. 440
North St.
Avenue C
Avenue C
Rt. 440 SB Jersey City
to Staten Island
Through Traffic Detour
Legend
Goldsborough Drive
Rt. 440
N
Closure of On-ramp
for Stage 1 and 2
Construction
Costco
34th St. HBLR Station
CVS
Rt. 440
Detour Route for Port Terminal Blvd. WB to
Rt. 440 NB
Port Terminal Blvd.
Starbucks
Lidl
Rt. 440 NB Detour
Legend
ROW Impact Plan
Appendix N
Public Communications
279 |
Utility Contact Letter No. 1
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Doug Kuenzel
PSE&G
325 County Avenue
Secaucus, NJ 07094
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Kuenzel,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that PSE&G Electric is franchised to operate within
the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Mauricio Torres
PSE&G
444 St. Pauls Avenue
Jersey City, NJ 07306
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Torres,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a
project known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your
reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that PSE&G Gas is franchised to operate within the
proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you
to notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project
limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our
facilities should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
November 8, 2022
Mr. Thomas H. Young
Senior Manager
Verizon New Jersey Inc.
657 Florida Grove Road
Hopelawn, NJ 08861
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Young,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a
project known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your
reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that Verizon Fiber Optic is franchised to operate
within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for
you to notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by December 2, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project
limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our
facilities should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
November 8, 2022
Mr. Thomas H. Young
Senior Manager
Verizon New Jersey Inc.
657 Florida Grove Road
Hopelawn, NJ 08861
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Young,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a
project known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your
reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that Verizon Telephone is franchised to operate
within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for
you to notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by December 2, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project
limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our
facilities should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Glenn Cisek
Altice USA
1111 Stewart Avenue
Bethpage, NY 11714
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Cisek,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that Altice USA Cable is franchised to operate within
the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Steve Fought
Williams Transco
718 Paterson Plank Road
Carlstadt, NJ, 07072
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Fought,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that Williams Transco Gas is franchised to operate
within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Robert Mieczkowski
IMTT Pipeline Manager
IMTT
250 E. 22nd Street
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Mieczkowski,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that IMTT Gas Pipeline is franchised to operate
within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
Brian Waters (IMTT)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. John Armstrong, PE
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division
630 Avenue C
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Armstrong,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project known
as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The Peninsula at
Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division – Sewer is
franchised to operate within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s
proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to notify
us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022. Please
return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company
______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities should it
be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. John Armstrong, PE
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division
630 Avenue C
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Armstrong,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division –
Water is franchised to operate within the proposed project limits and may have facilities
affected by the City’s proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
Utility Contact Letter No. 1 Responses
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Mauricio Torres
PSE&G
444 St. Pauls Avenue
Jersey City, NJ 07306
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Torres,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a
project known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your
reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that PSE&G Gas is franchised to operate within the
proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you
to notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project
limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our
facilities should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
Mauricio Torres
PSEG
Central Division Layout Spv.
444 St Pauls Ave
Jersey City, NJ 07306
201 - 616-9060
Mauricio.Torres@PSEG.com
x
Gas Construction
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
&LW\RI%D\RQQH
68=$11(70$&.
33$,&3&73),7($+3
&,7<3/$11(5
081,&,3$/%8,/',1*
$9(18(&
%$<211(1-
7(/
)$;
(0$,/ VPDFN#ED\QMRUJ
1RYHPEHU
0U7KRPDV+<RXQJ
6HQLRU0DQDJHU
9HUL]RQ1HZ-HUVH\,QF
)ORULGD*URYH5RDG
+RSHODZQ1-
5H
3URMHFW'HVLJQHU
&LW\RI%D\RQQH3HGHVWULDQ%ULGJHRYHU
5RXWH%HWZHHQWKHWK6WUHHW/576WDWLRQ
$QG7KH3HQLQVXODDW%D\RQQH+DUERU
&LW\RI%D\RQQH+XGVRQ&RXQW\1-
7</LQ
(QWHUSULVH'ULYH6XLWH
5RFNDZD\1-
$771 0LFKDHO3&DPHUOHQJR3(
0LFKDHOFDPHUOHQJR#W\OLQFRP
'HDU0U<RXQJ
7KH&LW\RI%D\RQQHKDVHQJDJHGXVWRFRPSOHWHWKH&RQFHSW'HYHORSPHQW6WXG\IRUD
SURMHFWNQRZQDV3HGHVWULDQ%ULGJHRYHU5RXWH%HWZHHQWKHWK6WUHHW/576WDWLRQ
DQG 7KH 3HQLQVXOD DW %D\RQQH +DUERU $ SURMHFW ORFDWLRQ PDS LV DWWDFKHG IRU \RXU
UHIHUHQFH
2XUSUHOLPLQDU\LQYHVWLJDWLRQGLVFORVHGWKDW9HUL]RQ)LEHU2SWLFLVIUDQFKLVHGWRRSHUDWH
ZLWKLQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWOLPLWVDQGPD\KDYHIDFLOLWLHVDIIHFWHGE\WKH&LW\¶VSURSRVHG
FRQVWUXFWLRQ
6KRXOG\RXKDYHH[LVWLQJRUSURSRVHGSODQVZLWKLQWKHSURMHFWOLPLWVLWLVQHFHVVDU\IRU
\RXWRQRWLI\XV
3OHDVHFRPSOHWHWKHIROORZLQJTXHVWLRQQDLUHDQGUHWXUQLWWR7</LQE\'HFHPEHU
3OHDVHUHWXUQWKHTXHVWLRQQDLUHE\PDLORUHPDLO
7KH
3HQLQVXOD2I
%XVLQHVV$QG
7HFKQRORJ\
BBBB 7KH&RPSDQ\(QJLQHHUWREHFRQWDFWHGLV
1DPH
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
&RPSDQ\BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
7LWOH
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
$GGUHVV
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
7HO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
)D[ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
(PDLO
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBB :H'2+$9(H[LVWLQJIDFLOLWLHVZLWKLQWKHSURMHFWOLPLWV
BBBB :H'2127+$9(H[LVWLQJIDFLOLWLHVZLWKLQWKHSURMHFWOLPLWV
BBBB :H+$9(352326('IDFLOLWLHVSODQQHGZLWKLQWKHSURMHFWOLPLWV
BBBB 7KH IROORZLQJ FRPSDQLHV DUH WHQDQWV RQLQ RXU IDFLOLWLHV ZLWKLQ WKH SURMHFW
OLPLWV
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBB :H ZRXOG OLNH WKH &LW\ WR DUUDQJH IRU WKH IROORZLQJ ZRUN WR EH GRQH IRU RXU
IDFLOLWLHVVKRXOGLWEHQHFHVVDU\IRUWKHPWREHUHORFDWHGRUPRGLILHG
BBBBB 'HVLJQ(QJLQHHULQJ
BBBBB &RQVWUXFWLRQ±6RPHRU$OO"BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBB 1HLWKHU±WKH&RPSDQ\ZLOOSHUIRUP RUDUUDQJHWRKDYHSHUIRUPHG DOO
QHHGHGZRUN
BBBBB 1RWFHUWDLQDWWKLVWLPH
4XHVWLRQVFRQFHUQLQJWKLVPDWWHUVKRXOGEHGLUHFWHGWR7</LQ
7KDQN\RXIRU\RXUFRRSHUDWLRQLQWKLVPDWWHU
6LQFHUHO\
0LFKDHO3&DPHUOHQJR3(
7</LQ3URMHFW0DQDJHU
$WWDFKPHQW
F
6X]DQQH0DFN &LW\RI%D\RQQH
$QGUHZ5DLFKOH 0DWUL[1HZ:RUOG
.5=<6=72)2*52'1,.
9(5,=211-
263(1*,1((5
)/25,'$*529(5'
+23(/$:11-
.5=<6=72)2*52'1,.#9(5,=21&20
X
X
X
TBD
X
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. Glenn Cisek
Altice USA
1111 Stewart Avenue
Bethpage, NY 11714
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Cisek,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that Altice USA Cable is franchised to operate within
the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s proposed
construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
(____) The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name
______________________________________
Company ______________________________________
Title
______________________________________
Address
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
______________________________________
Tel: ______________________________________
Fax: ______________________________________
Email:
______________________________________
(____) We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
(____) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
(____) The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
(____) We would like the City to arrange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
(_____) Design/Engineering
(_____) Construction – Some or All? _________________
(_____) Neither – the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
(_____) Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
c:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World)
X
Craig McLead
Sr Director Construction
Cablevision / Altice USA
40 Pine St
Tinton Falls NJ 07753
craig.mcleod@alticeusa.com
Shaun Maxwell
Sr Utility Associate
Cablevision / Altice USA
320 South Sparta Av
Sparta NJ 07871
646-772-0284
shaun.maxwell@alticeusa.com
X
X
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
LEGEND
FTTH FIBER
COAX CABLE
LIGHTPATH FIBER
optimum
let's connect more
UNDERGROUND SERVICE
AERIAL SERVICE
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. John Armstrong, PE
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division
630 Avenue C
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Armstrong,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project known
as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The Peninsula at
Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division – Sewer is
franchised to operate within the proposed project limits and may have facilities affected by the City’s
proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to notify
us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022. Please
return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
L__J The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name :.fr*n $p*ts'fE*'Nr&
Company
Title
Address
Ct
Vr?r>.=t,u*€
N,7 fi 7aa2-
Tel:
Fax:
Email:
.1
We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits
L-)
We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
L_-) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
[_)
The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
-Lq\r'//cr'flLS
L-)
We would like the City to iurange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
C__-) DesignlEngineering
L_-) Construction - Some or All?
L_-)
Neither - the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
t V I Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
L_L)
wP@
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (MatrixNew World)
c:
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
City of Bayonne
SUZANNE T. MACK
PP, AICP, CTP, FITE, AHP
CITY PLANNER
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
630 AVENUE C
BAYONNE, NJ 07002
TEL. 201-858-6138
FAX 201-858-6185
E-MAIL: smack@baynj.org
September 28, 2022
Mr. John Armstrong, PE
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division
630 Avenue C
Bayonne, NJ 07002
Re:
Project Designer:
City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over
Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station
And The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
City of Bayonne, Hudson County, NJ
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866
ATTN: Michael P. Camerlengo, PE
(908) 441-7177
Michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
Dear Mr. Armstrong,
The City of Bayonne has engaged us to complete the Concept Development Study for a project
known as Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between the 34th Street LRT Station and The
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor. A project location map is attached for your reference.
Our preliminary investigation disclosed that City of Bayonne Water and Sewer Division –
Water is franchised to operate within the proposed project limits and may have facilities
affected by the City’s proposed construction.
Should you have existing or proposed plans within the project limits, it is necessary for you to
notify us.
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it to TYLin by October 21, 2022.
Please return the questionnaire by mail or email.
The
Peninsula Of
Business And
Technology
L__J The Company Engineer to be contacted is:
Name :.fr*n $p*ts'fE*'Nr&
Company
Title
Address
Ct
Vr?r>.=t,u*€
N,7 fi 7aa2-
Tel:
Fax:
Email:
.1
We DO HAVE existing facilities within the project limits
L-)
We DO NOT HAVE existing facilities within the project limits.
L_-) We HAVE PROPOSED facilities planned within the project limits.
[_)
The following companies are tenants on/in our facilities within the project limits:
-Lq\r'//cr'flLS
L-)
We would like the City to iurange for the following work to be done for our facilities
should it be necessary for them to be relocated or modified.
C__-) DesignlEngineering
L_-) Construction - Some or All?
L_-)
Neither - the Company will perform (or arrange to have performed) all
needed work.
t V I Not certain at this time.
Questions concerning this matter should be directed to TYLin.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
L_L)
wP@
TYLin Project Manager
Attachment
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Andrew Raichle (MatrixNew World)
c:
PROJECT CORRIDOR
Lefante Way
E 31st St
Prospect Ave
E 30th St
E 29th St
E 30th St
E 31st St
E 32nd St
Willow St
E 33rd St
Broadway
E 34th St
E 35th St
Avenue C
Chosin Few
Way
Goldsborough Dr
Avenue E
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes
Sam Schwartz
30 Montgomery Street #1340
Jersey City, NJ 07302
samschwartz.com
Meeting Summary
Project Name: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Location: Via Microsoft Teams
Date & Time: 12/16/2022 at 10AM
Subject: Stakeholders Meeting #1
I.
Welcome & Introductions
Attendees: Jay Coffey (City of Bayonne), David Conte (City of Bayonne), Suzanne Mack (City of
Bayonne), Kristen Figaro (PANYNJ), Jimmy Davis (City of Bayonne), Amy Gajewski (City of
Bayonne), Sean Kushnir (NJ TRANSIT), Edoardo Ferrante (City of Bayonne), Gary LaPelusa
(City of Bayonne), Alphonse Major (City of Bayonne), Luis Delgado (Hudson TMA), Marcella
Traina (Hudson County), Stephen Pezdek (PANYNJ), Tim Feeney (Cape Cruise Port),
Ikponmwosa Alile (Marine Terminals), Jason Bergman (Assembly Member Rep for William
Sampson), Kevin Walkes (PANYNJ), Alan Miller (NJDEP), Francesco Alessi (South Cove
Commons), Tom Hinderhofer (Royal Caribbean), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Kenny
Kopacz (Bayonne School District), Samantha Donovan (Sam Schwartz), Steven Wong (Sam
Schwartz), Janki Patel (Sam Schwartz), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin), Jim Lester (TYLin)
Ms. Donovan of Sam Schwartz started the meeting with a brief welcome and moderated the
introduction of attendees.
II.
Agenda
Mr. Camerlengo of TYLin reviewed the agenda for the Stakeholder Meeting. The agenda included
an overview of the project and the Concept Development process, which includes data collection,
purpose & need statement, project goals, alternatives analysis, design constraints, and
community outreach, Additionally, time would be provided to review action items & next steps,
and an open discussion period for the Stakeholders.
III.
Concept Development Overview
The Concept Development process was reviewed. This process includes the following steps:
•
Conduct Data Collection
•
Evaluate Deficiencies
•
Coordinate Stakeholders
•
Public Involvement
•
Environmental Screening
•
Development of Alternatives
•
Alternatives Analysis
•
Determine the Preliminary Preferred Alternative
After Concept Development, this study will move on to Preliminary Engineering, Final Design, and
finally Construction.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 2 of 7
IV.
Data Collection
The project team conducted multiple field visits to evaluate existing conditions, starting in
October. They acquired and reviewed existing available documentation, including as-built and
master plans from NJDOT, NJ TRANSIT, and the City of Bayonne.
a. Utilities
As part of the data collection effort, letters were sent to the nine utility companies with
services within the project corridor. As of this meeting, eight responses have been
received. Subsequent to the meeting, the final utility company responded to TYLin’s
Utility Contact Letter No. 1. The information provided highlights the location of the
existing utilities. During Preliminary Engineering, the utility companies will be requested
to provide exact locations.
•
Verizon and PSE&G have aerial utilities on the NB side poles along Route 440
•
IMTT, Williams, & HESS have underground gas running along the NB side of
Route 440
•
Underground sewage mains run along the project corridor
b. Vehicle, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Counts
Some of the observations from the vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle counts conducted in
November included:
•
More pedestrians crossed Route 440 at the E 32nd and Lefante Way
intersection
•
Many pedestrians were observed crossing mid-block, jumping over the
concrete median barrier on Route 440 near Goldsborough Drive; pedestrian
counts at this intersection are lower than anticipated for this reason
•
The project team has requested traffic signal timing and phasing plans at both
the Lefante Way and Goldsborough Drive intersections with Route 440. The
timing and phasing plans will be utilized to fully assess the corridor to
determine how well it operates and the level of service. Subsequent to this
meeting, the project team has received these plans and is currently analyzing
the information.
c. Property Ownership
Based on the data collected, property ownership information and roadway jurisdiction
have been identified.
•
The City of Bayonne owns the area on the Route 440 NB side adjacent to the
CVS parking lot which could potentially be used to construct the foundation of
the bridge pier
•
NJ TRANSIT owns the 34th Street HBLR Station
•
Route 440 is under the NJDOT Jurisdiction
•
Goldsborough Drive is under the City of Bayonne’s Jurisdiction
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 3 of 7
V.
Purpose & Need and Project Goals
After collecting and assessing the existing data, the project team developed a draft Purpose &
Need Statement. The stakeholders were asked to provide any input for modifications.
a. Project Purpose
The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting pedestrians
and bicycles from the east side of Route 440 just south of Goldsborough Drive to the
west side of Route 440 at the 34th St HBLR Station.
b. Project Need
•
No safe pedestrian crossing in the project vicinity. Closest is at grade ~0.25 miles
south
•
Increased need for residents west of Route 440 to access destinations around PABH
•
Increased need for residents of PABH to access the 34th Street HBLR Station
c. Project Goals
As we move through the Concept Development phase and subsequently into the other
phases, the goals include:
•
Develop a safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Route 440 in the vicinity
of Goldsborough Drive
•
Keep the public and stakeholders informed about the project through all
phases
•
Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian crossing
•
Minimize impacts to Route 440 traffic, stakeholders, and utilities
•
Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical under clearance and sight distance to the
traffic signal
•
Minimize impacts of traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive during
construction
VI.
Alternative Analysis
Alternatives development and analysis will begin in early 2023. Possible alternatives for
consideration were provided. Mr. Lester of TYLin presented three possible alternatives and key
factors of each.
a. Alternative 1 – Single Span Truss
•
Similar aesthetics to the existing bridge on NJ TRANSIT HBLR property
•
Moderate construction duration and cost
•
Requires relocation of powerlines
•
Higher maintenance cost
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 4 of 7
b. Alternative 2 – Two Span Sleek Concrete
•
Reduced structure depth
•
Reduce maintenance cost
•
Moderate construction duration
•
Longer ADA ramp may increase the footprint
•
Pier in the median may require modifications to the median
c. Alternative 3 – Goldsborough Dr. At-Grade Crossing
•
Least costly build alternative
•
Least impact on utilities and ROW
•
Lower pedestrian safety
•
Reduced traffic signal operations
•
Not a direct connection to HBLR station
Developed alternatives will be evaluated:
•
Alternative Impact Assessment- An Alternatives Impact Analysis will be performed to
evaluate the developed alternatives. The analysis will include impacts to traffic based on
the alternatives and during the construction of the alternatives, impacts to ROW, utilities,
safety benefits, and other factors identified. The data analysis will be summarized in an
Alternatives Matrix which will be the final outcome of this assessment.
•
Selection of the PPA- The Preliminary Preferred Alternative is selected based on the
evaluation of the Alternatives Matrix and input from the public and stakeholders. Cost
estimates and a ROW & Access Impact Plan will be developed for the PPA.
VII.
Current Conditions and Design Constraints
A few major constraints were identified:
•
Where the existing reinforced concrete pier stands, is where a new pedestrian will be
proposed to tie into the existing. The top of the existing pier was constructed to
accommodate the attachment of a proposed pedestrian bridge across Route 440.
•
The signalized intersection at Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive may have detrimental
traffic impacts if crossing improvements are to be made. Maintaining appropriate sight
distance to the traffic signal will be required if a bridge over Route 440 is proposed.
•
The area adjacent to the CVS parking lot, which is owned by the City of Bayonne, is
where the east landing of a proposed pedestrian bridge could be placed. Also, the utilities
and stormwater along Route 440 NB could be a constraint.
•
There is potential to utilize the existing median separating the Route 440 NB and SB
travel lanes, depending on the alternative, to construct a pier to support the proposed
pedestrian bridge.
Ms. Donovan of Sam Schwartz presented the community outreach and engagement efforts for
this project.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 5 of 7
VIII.
Community Outreach
a. Community Profile
A Community Profile was prepared in October utilizing 2020 Census data. Based on the
Community Profile, multi-lingual outreach, for in-person meetings, as well as printed
materials, would be required. The services will be provided throughout the project to
provide the various communities within the project area the opportunity to learn about,
participate and provide input into the project.
b. Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP)
A Public Involvement Action Plan was developed that outlines the different outreach
events and activities that will be held throughout the Concept Development phase of the
project. A summary of those meetings is as follows:
•
Stakeholders Meeting 1- December 16th, 2022
•
Stakeholders Meeting 2- February 2023
•
City Council Presentation- May 2023
•
Public Information Center- June 2023
c. Webpage Development
A project website was developed for this project and was made available to the public on
the date of Stakeholder Meeting #1 (December 16, 2022)
https://34thstbayonnepedestrianbridge.com. The website provides a project overview and
information about the Concept Development process and includes FAQs, provides links
to helpful documents and resources throughout the study, and has a comment form to
enable site visitors to leave questions or comments. The comment form is linked to an
email the City of Bayonne has created.
IX.
Action Items & Next Steps
a. December 2022
•
Finalize Purpose and Need Statement
•
Finalize Project Fact Sheet
b. January 2023
•
Develop Alternatives
•
Detour and construction staging plans
•
Cost estimates
•
Alternatives Matrix
c. February 2023
•
Stakeholders Meeting 2
d. September 2023
•
CD Phase is complete
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 6 of 7
X.
Open Discussion
Question: Does Alternative 1 and 2 require any movement of utilities?
Response (Michael Camerlengo): The overhead utilities will require relocation for most
alternatives, but we are trying to avoid the relocation of the gas mains.
Question: Is Alternative 1 similar to the Florida Pedestrian Bridge that collapsed?
Response (Jim Lester): The mechanics are a little different in the structural design. The
FIU bridge was a post-tension concrete structure, while the potential design for
Alternative 1 would be a steel structure mimicking the existing pedestrian bridge at the
34th St. HBLR Station.
Question: What happens to the NB traffic signal visibility when the bridge is put up? Will there be
flashing signals, red light ahead signs, or will the traffic light need to be lowered?
Response: (Michael Camerlengo & Jim Lester) Preliminary investigation based on the
available plans and existing survey information, leads TYLin to believe that the existing
traffic signal will remain visible with a proposed pedestrian bridge. During the Alternatives
Analysis, TYLin will investigate further.
Question: (David Conte) This intersection experiences a relatively high number of rear-end
crashes due to driver inattention. Can we make the height of the bridge as high as possible to
accommodate oversized loads coming through in the future? It may or may not happen but if we
could have it built into the system that would be good.
Response: (Michael Camerlengo) The height would be limited due to the height of the
existing pedestrian bridge at the transit station.
Question: (David Conte) Who’s in charge of maintenance 5-10 years down the road?
Response: (Michael Camerlengo & Jim Lester) That is a further discussion on
jurisdiction maintenance. It will be discussed during this phase when the jurisdiction isn’t
clear-cut. We will work with the city to make this definitive and put it in the Concept
Development Report. A jurisdiction map can be developed and put on record during the
later phases.
Question: (Suzanne Mack) NJTPA isn’t on this meeting because this phase is being funded by
federal money. Their response was that they will come in after the CD phase is done to initiate
funding during the 2nd phase, the PE phase. Mike, is that part of your work to get us ready?
Response: (Michael Camerlengo) Through this project, a PPA will be selected and the
scope of work for the PE Phase defined. It is anticipated the RFP for Preliminary
Engineering and Final Design would be issued by the City.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #1 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 7 of 7
Response: (Suzanne Mack) NJDOT helped us out with this RFP so we will work with
their project manager. If we could speed up any part of the process that would be great.
Question: (David Conte & Suzanne Mack) Can we implement a Pickup/Drop-off Zone for buses
and cars? To pull away from the traffic area because some people will come off the light rail to go
to the cruise port. Right now, it is unclear if there is a pickup/drop-off zone. The Cruise Port is
also on the call today, we should further discuss this with them.
Response: (Michael Camerlengo) We will take that into consideration as we further
develop things to determine feasibility.
Question: (Andy Raichle) In other projects utilities go over the bridge, for example, County Park
in Jersey City where the golf course is if this is an option here?
Response: (Michael Camerlengo) The potential for relocation of the existing overhead
utilities was discussed with PSE&G at an early coordination meeting held in September.
During Alternatives Analysis, TYLin will meet with PSE&G again to determine the options
for relocating the overhead utilities. Both above-ground (vertical or lateral) and below-
ground relocation will be discussed.
Discussion:
(Francesco Alessi) There is dead space by the existing bridge that has access to the parking lot.
We assessed it years ago, but it would be a good area to put a kiss-n-ride or a drop-off location.
Getting through the facility and coming out through the NJ TRANSIT parking lot is an idea. The
cars end up recirculating and there is no clean way to get across the highway for another 2-3
intersections away.
(Suzanne Mack) Sean from NJ TRANSIT is on this call, NJ TRANSIT has approached us to
reopen the 34th St redevelopment plan which I believe we will see the council in January to
reopen. We should take into consideration what Frank is saying to put them in the updated plan.
That will go into an RFP to guide the transit-oriented development. We should look at that section
on both sides.
(Francesco Alessi) The kiss-n-ride makes sense to promote pedestrian access. Now that both
sides are activated from ferry, cruise terminal, retail, and residential. We should promote
pedestrian access without cars recirculating back through the public roadways and congesting
them.
(Suzanne Mack) The Ferry Project has approved a shuttle service and we are brainstorming
pickup points (Broadway, Avenue C), so this is also something to consider. We can start thinking
about more things linked to this bridge project.
Ms. Donovan of Sam Schwartz ended the meeting with some closing remarks.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Mr. Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes
Sam Schwartz
30 Montgomery Street #1340
Jersey City, NJ 07302
samschwartz.com
Meeting Summary
Project Name: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Location: Via Microsoft Teams
Date & Time: 4/6/2023 at 10AM
Subject: Stakeholders Meeting #2
I.
Welcome & Introductions
Attendees: Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne), Kristen Figaro (PANYNJ), Sabyasachi Chatterjee
(PANYNJ), Sean Kushnir (NJ TRANSIT), Eduardo Ferrante (City of Bayonne), Alphonse Major
(City of Bayonne), Luis Delgado (Hudson TMA), Marcella Traina (Hudson County), Stephen
Pezdek (PANYNJ), Danielle Gaskins (Cape Cruise Port), Tim Feeney (Cape Cruise Port), Alan
Miller (NJDEP), Andrew Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Ryan
Flanagan (PANYNJ), Maxim Larin (PANYNJ), James Stauniczy (Royal Caribbean), Samantha
Donovan (Sam Schwartz), Janki Patel (Sam Schwartz), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin), Jim Lester
(TYLin)
Samantha Donovan of Sam Schwartz started the meeting with a brief welcome and moderated
the introduction of attendees.
II.
Agenda
Michael Camerlengo of TYLin reviewed the agenda for the Stakeholder Meeting. The agenda
included a project recap up until this point, a review of the alternatives developed and their
analysis, a discussion of utility relocations required for this project, construction staging for all the
alternatives, action items and next steps, and questions from the group.
III.
Project Recap
This study is focused on identifying and assessing alternatives that facilitate pedestrian crossings
of Route 440 in the vicinity of Goldsborough Drive to access the NJ TRANSIT Light Rail Station.
To date, the project team has collected data regarding utilities, evaluated deficiencies, developed
alternatives, and analyzed the alternatives.
a. Data Collection- Fall 2022
As part of the data collection efforts, traffic counts have been collected in the area
focusing on the Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive intersection.
When projected out to 2045 in the no-build condition, the AM peak gets worse and PM
peak stays the same.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 2 of 9
b. Project Website
A project website was developed which has information regarding the study and an area
where the public can submit input and questions.
https://34thstbayonnepedestrianbridge.com/
c. Stakeholder Meeting #1- December 2022
The project was introduced and the opportunity for stakeholders to provide input was
given. This meeting is to provide an update on where the project team is at with the
development of the alternatives.
IV.
Alternatives Analysis
The project team has developed 4 alternatives for this project.
a. Alternative 1: Goldsborough Drive At-Grade Crossing
This is an at-grade crossing at Goldsborough Drive that has no bridge associated. This is
a no-build option. The crosswalk would be located on the south side of Goldsborough
Drive with a pedestrian signal for protected crossing of Rt. 440. A sidewalk is connected
from the crosswalk at Goldsborough Drive all the way down to Prospect Avenue where
pedestrians can access the NJ TRANSIT Station. This alternative will involve traffic signal
upgrades for pedestrians and the construction of guide rail, curb, and drainage.
i. Pros
Least expensive alternative
Shortest construction duration (One construction season)
Limited impact to Rt. 440 traffic during construction (Temporary closure
of Rt. 440 SB shoulder)
Relocation of overhead utilities is not required
ii. Cons
Does not eliminate at-grade crossing. Potential remains for
vehicular/pedestrian collisions
Intersection Level of Service (LOS) reduced to F when introducing
predicted pedestrian signal timing
Drainage system upgrades required
Jim Lester of TYLin took over to present the rest of the alternatives.
b. Alternative 2: Single-Span Truss
The rendering shows the proposed structure connects to the existing NJ TRANIST
structure that goes to the light rail station. The east side has a landing with stairs and an
elevator system in the open grass area that is existing.
i. Pros
Provides ADA-compliant, grade-separated crossing which is a significant
improvement over the existing condition and alternative 1
Moderate construction duration (One construction season)
No impact to intersection LOS because there will be no changes to the
traffic signal times at the Goldsborough Drive intersection
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 3 of 9
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction - only requires
temporary lane shifts of Roue 440 NB to construct the east side landing,
still maintaining 3 lanes of traffic in the NB direction
Covered bridge eliminates snow removal maintenance
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components
Minor drainage improvements are required on the east side of Route 440
ii. Cons
Most expensive “build” alternative
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
One overnight closure of Rt. 440 required for the installation of the truss
Andrew Raichle of Matrix New World asked if this alternative is working within the available Right-
of-Way (ROW).
Jim Lester responded in the affirmative, noting there will be no encroachment to the CVS Parking
Lot on the east side. On the west side, there will need to be coordination with NJ TRANSIT as the
existing structure is on their property. Work would have to be performed to get the truss onto the
existing pier and cut into the existing tower.
c. Alternative 3: Two-Span Sleek Concrete
This alternative requires a pier in the center median of Route 440 resulting in adjustments
to the median barrier in the area. The existing median is wide so the project team thinks it
can be accommodated easily. The rendering shows different material usage from
alternative 1, uncovered, and the center pier.
Andrew Raichle wanted to clarify that the last three alternatives (Alts. 2, 3, and 4) being
presented require an elevator because there is not enough room within the existing ROW to
provide an ADA compliant ramp. Jim Lester added that during the early alternatives analysis
phase, the TYLin team did look into providing a ramp system. Due to needing ADA compliant
slopes and breaks in slopes, it would have extended outside the City’s ROW so it was determined
that it was not within the scope of this project or the desire to acquire a ROW to provide a ramp
system.
i. Pros
Provides ADA-compliant, grade-separated crossing which is a significant
improvement over the existing condition and alternative 1
No impact to intersection LOS because there will be no changes to the
traffic signal timings at the Goldsborough Drive intersection
Minor drainage improvements are required on the east side of Route 440
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components
ii. Cons
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
Longest construction duration (Two construction seasons) due to the
work in the median and the time for the concrete pouring and curing
cycles
Two overnight closures of Rt. 440 required – the first for the temporary
falsework installation and the second for the removal of the falsework
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 4 of 9
Multiple Rt. 440 lane shifts during construction (for pier/median, east
landing, and bridge construction)
Snow removal maintenance required
d. Alternative 4: Simple Through Girder
This is a simpler structure, not as aesthetically pleasing but desirable from a cost
standpoint. It has two steel girders, a concrete deck, a steel floor beam system, and a
curved top with a chain link fence to protect pedestrians.
i. Pros
Provides ADA-compliant, grade-separated crossing which is a significant
improvement over the existing condition and alternative 1
No impact to intersection LOS because there will be no changes to the
traffic signal timings at the Goldsborough Drive intersection
Least expensive “build” alternative
Moderate construction duration (One construction season)
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction - only requires
temporary lane shifts of Roue 440 NB to construct the east side landing
Minor drainage improvements are required on the east side of Route 440
ii. Cons
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
One overnight closure of Rt. 440 required for the installation of girders
Lacks architectural/aesthetic components
Snow removal maintenance required
Andrew Raichle asked Jim Lester to provide clarification of the terms “one construction season”
and “winter shutdown”. Jim Lester clarified that construction seasons are when the majority of
construction work occurs and is between March 16th and November 30th. Winter shutdowns in this
area are from December 1st to March 15th. That does not mean no work can be done, but
contractors are limited on what work can be done.
Suzanne Mack from the City of Bayonne asked if the project team could provide a rendering for
Alternative 4 before the Council Meeting. Jim Lester confirmed that this would be possible.
Michael Camerlengo of TYLin took over to present the Utility Relocation Alternatives.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 5 of 9
V.
Utility Relocation Alternatives
The project team coordinated with the utility companies in the area and anticipate there will be no
conflict with the underground utilities in the area. During the Design Phase, this will be confirmed
with the subsurface utility investigations. Aerial utilities are anticipated to be relocated. There is a
pole line on Route 440 NB that carries electric, cable, and telephone utilities. This pole line is
directly in the path of the east landing of the proposed bridge. The project team started
coordinating with PSE&G andtogether, they were able to come up with three alternatives for the
relocation of the utilities.
a. Vertical Relocation
This option would increase the pole length and relocate the utilities higher outside of the
clearance envelope of the proposed structure.
This option is not feasible due to the planned addition of PSE&G lines and the
excessive pole height required.
Eduardo Ferrante from the City of Bayonne asked if PSE&G was asked to cease their plan to add
additional lines at this time in order to not add extra costs to this planned pedestrian bridge project.
Michael Camerlengo noted that based on TYLin’s meeting with PSE&G, their timeline for the addition
of lines in not certain. This comment was noted and can be mentioned the next time TYLin meets with
PSE&G.” Andrew Raichle added that PSE&G should participate financially in these improvements if
the City is making it easier for them while constructing the pedestrian bridge.
b. Horizontal Relocation
This option would move the poles and utilities away from the proposed structure.
This option is not feasible for PSE&G as clearance for access and clearance to the
proposed structure are concerns. Additionally, ROW acquisitions may be needed in
order to guy the relocated utility poles.
This option is potentially feasible for Verizon and Altice/Cablevision lines pending
guying.
c. Underground Relocation
This option is feasible for all utilities but would be the costliest way of relocating them.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 6 of 9
VI.
Construction Staging
The project team looked at construction staging for each of the alternatives.
a. Alternative 1 - Goldsborough Dr. At-Grade Crossing
Stage 1: Demolition
a. Demolish existing guide rail, remove existing overhead sign structure
Stage 2: Sidewalk, Drainage, and Guide Rail Construction
a. Construct sidewalk, curbing, drainage, guide rail, and drainage ditch on the
west side
Stage 3: Striping, Pedestrian Signals, and Traffic Signal Timing
a. Striping of crosswalk and median, installation of new pedestrian signals and
push buttons, adjustment of traffic signal timing
The impact of Route 440 is expected to be minimal with only a shoulder closure
anticipated.
b. Alternative 2 - Single-Span Truss & Alternative 4 - Simple Through Girder
Stage 1: Utility Relocation
a. Relocate existing aerial utilities underground towards the east edge of the
existing ROW
Stage 2: Pier/Stairs/Elevator
a. Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system
Stage 3: Bridge Erection
a. Temporary full closure of Rt. 440 required for crane positioning and bridge
erection
To construct the pier, stairs, and elevator for the east landing, traffic would be shifted toward the median.
The project team anticipates all lanes would be maintained during this construction. For the construction
of the bridge and installing the truss into place, the project team anticipates a temporary overnight closure
of Route 440. Currently, detour routes are being worked out.
c. Alternative 3 - Two-Span Sleek Concrete
This option will have a pier in the center median and on the east landing.
Stage 1: Utility Relocation
a. Relocate existing aerial utilities underground towards the east edge of the
existing ROW
Stage 2: East Pier/Stairs/Elevator
a. Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system
Stage 3: Center Pier and Median Barrier
a. Demolish the existing median barrier, construct the proposed center pier
footing, column, and cap, then construct the final median barrier
Stage 4: Bridge Erection
a. Overnight closure of Rt. 440 for falsework construction. Concrete formwork,
reinforcement, concrete pouring and curing. Overnight closure of Rt. 440 for
falsework deconstruction.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 7 of 9
During stages 1 and 2 traffic would be shifted toward the median maintaining all lanes of traffic. During
stage 3 when the center median work would be done, the traffic would be shifted away from the median
maintaining all lanes of traffic. For the last stage, two closures of Route 440 are anticipated for the
construction and removal of the falsework.
VII.
Action Items & Next Steps
a. May 2023
Meeting with NJDOT Subject Matter Experts
Finalize Alternatives Analysis
b. June 2023
Town Council Presentation
Public Information Center
c. July/August 2023
Submit Draft CD Report
Reviews by City and NJDOT
d. September 2023
CD Phase complete
VIII.
Open Discussion
Question (Andrew Raichle): Why did we not look at a tunnel as a reasonable alternative option?
Response (Michael Camerlengo): A tunnel alternative was not part of the original
request for proposal or included in the scope of work. However, TYLin will prepare a
memorandum regarding the feasibility of a tunnel alternative.
Question (Suzanne Mack): The 2nd Alternative is the most expensive. Is that similar in visual
and architecture to what is existing now?
Response (Jim Lester): It’s similar in the fact that it’s a steel truss which is what the
existing structure is. It could be glass enclosed. The current rendering shows some
fencing on the sides of the truss. That can be changed to a glass-enclosed truss which
would be more similar to what is existing. In the rendering it’s shown as black painted
steel, the existing is blue so we can talk about paint colors in more detail.
Question (Suzanne Mack): We also talked about how you would include Lt. Conte from our
traffic unit about some of the lane closure issues. You’ve had some conversations with him,
correct? We will get some input from him before the Council Meeting because the Council will
have the same questions.
Response (Jim Lester): That is correct. Once TYLin has prepared potential detour
alternatives and lane shift concepts, coordination will be conducted with Lt. Conte to
receive his input.
Question (Andrew Raichle): Is the eastern landing on piles?
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 8 of 9
Response (Jim Lester): The current cost estimate assumes it’s on piles. The proposed
foundation type will be studied as we continue to study alternatives and further refined in
subsequent phases of the project.
Question (Andrew Raichle): Your cost estimate presumed, the landing on the west side can
receive the proposed structure. Have you done any due diligence on that or is that an
assumption?
Response (Jim Lester): It’s an assumption based on the as-built drawings we received
from NJ TRANSIT. The inclusion of anchor bolts on the east edge of the existing pier
indicate that the pier and foundation are designed for a future pedestrian bridge over Rt.
440. We confirmed when we went out in the field that anchor bolts protruded out of the
top of the existing pier.
Question (Phil Scott): You mentioned that PSE&G does not plan to add any additions in the
immediate term, is there someone at PSE&G that you have been working with? So, we can get a
more definitive timeframe and details on that?
Response (Michael Camerlengo): Yes, we have that information, and I can send that to
you.
Question (Suzanne Mack): When we get to the east landing of the proposed bridge, will there
be any provision for a pick-up spot?
Response (Michael Camerlengo): Based on the request for proposal and the original
scope of work, the main purpose of this project is to look into the alternatives for the
pedestrian bridge. The addition of a pick-up spot at the east landing is something that can
be further assessed and discussed during the Preliminary Engineering (PE) Phase.
TYLin will note in the CD Report that this should be investigated during the PE Phase.
Question (Andrew Raichle): I know TYLin has done some preliminary cost work; I think it’s
important for the Bayonne team to understand what kind of numbers you’re talking about if you
can touch on that.
Response (Jim Lester): Sure, so Alternative 1 is the least expensive. We think that
would be under a million dollars. Once we get to 2, 3, and 4 you get more with the
alternatives. Those range from 4 million – 8 million dollars. That would exclude the utility
relocation cost.
Response (Suzanne Mack): The preliminary utility relocation cost is approximately $1.5
million and is the same for all three “build” alternatives. This is a preliminary estimate,
and we haven’t thought of any cost-sharing with public service. Utility costs are not
fundable by the federal grant. The City has assumed those are the costs they would have
to participate in. Those costs can be handled by developer contributions or bonding. The
city has taken steps to assure that the funding is in place.
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Stakeholder Meeting #2 Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 9 of 9
This project is being funded by Liberty Corridor Funds that were in place along this
corridor. The initial offering went on to NJTPA about 4.4 million which included the
concept study but did not include the design.
Samantha Donovan of Sam Schwartz ended the meeting with some closing remarks.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Mr. Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
Public Information Center Summary
Sam Schwartz
30 Montgomery Street #1340
Jersey City, NJ 07302
samschwartz.com
Public Information Center Summary
Project Name: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Location: Bayonne Municipal Building
Date & Time: 8/2/2023 from 6:00 – 8:00pm
Subject: Public Information Center
Overview
A Public Information Center (PIC) was held at the Bayonne Municipal Building on Wednesday, August 2nd
2023 from 6:00 – 8:00PM. This meeting was an Open House style event, this allowed residents and
community members to arrive at a time most convenient to them. The event included six (6) posters
showcasing site photos, detour routes, and information on the preliminary preferred alternative. In
addition to the posters, a PowerPoint presentation including additional details about the study was
scrolling for attendees to view. A handout was distributed to the attendees with a link to the project
website where they could submit additional questions and comments. Comment cards were also
distributed for the attendees to leave any immediate feedback for the project team.
Public notification of the PIC was made through legal notices posted in the Jersey Journal on 7/20/23 and
7/31/23 and the Star Ledger on 7/20/23. A PIC Notification Letter in the NJDOT standard format was
mailed to property owners within 350’ of the project limits. Information regarding the PIC was also posted
on the project’s website in advance of the PIC being held.
Attendees
29 individuals signed-in at the Welcome Table for the event, a copy of the sign-in sheet is included at the
end of this document.
Questions/Comments
Attendees had the opportunity to ask questions to project team members in attendance. Several of the
questions that were asked are included below. The comment submittal via the project website will remain
open for additional feedback and this document can be updated accordingly.
When will the bridge be constructed?
This study is currently in the Concept Development Phase, there are several additional phases
(Preliminary Engineering, and Final Design) that will need to be completed prior to the beginning of
Construction.
Will trucks be rerouted onto neighborhood streets?
Trucks will only be rerouted for any road closures during construction, these will not be long-term detours.
Why is a bridge being evaluated at this location and not other locations on Route 440?
There are several intersections and locations along Route 440 that do not have safe crossings for
pedestrians, this is not the only location that the city is investigating. Federal funding was provided for the
completion of this study, the original plans for the existing NJ Transit pedestrian structure included
Pedestrian Bridge Over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Public Information Center Summary
samschwartz.com
Page 2 of 2
provisions for a future pedestrian bridge over Route 440, and the City of Bayonne owns property on the
east side of Rt. 440 for the proposed east landing.
Will there be signage with contact phone numbers for elevator issues?
This is something that can be investigated/considered in later phases of the project.
Will there be similar studies conducted on other intersections, such as the Prospect Ave intersection or
the 21st St bridge?
Similar studies at other intersections to assess the feasibility of a pedestrian bridge or other
improvements is not part of the scope of work for this study. According to City of Bayonne Council
Members additional funding is being sought for studies/improvements at other intersections.
Will the bridge be enclosed to avoid people jumping and/or dropping rocks on vehicles?
The Preliminary Preferred Alternative is an enclosed bridge with a roof structure and chain-link fencing on
the sides. The New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) requires chain-link fencing at a
minimum to prevent these types of concerns and they will be included in this project in accordance with
the NJDOT standards.
Will there be sidewalk provided along the northbound side of Route 440 connecting Port Terminal
Boulevard to Goldsborough Drive?
Yes, a 6’-0” wide concrete sidewalk is being proposed along Route 440 northbound and connecting to
the existing sidewalks at Port Terminal Boulevard and Goldsborough Drive.
How will handicap individuals be able to access the proposed bridge?
The project will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and an elevator will be provided at
the east landing to connect individuals between the ground level and the elevated bridge. There are also
elevators at the existing NJ Transit pedestrian structure near the parking lot and the station platform.
The Hudson River Walkway adjacent to Port Terminal Boulevard is a location often used for birdwatching.
Will there be any impacts to this area during construction?
There are no anticipated impacts to this waterfront walkway from the proposed project.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Mr. Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
PSE&G Coordination Meeting Minutes
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
PSE&G Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
PSE&G Meeting Minutes
Date:
Friday, September 16, 2022
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM), Doug Kuenzle (PSE&G Electric),
Jeanna DeSimone (PSE&G), Mauricio Torres (PSE&G Jersey City Gas), Mike Patterson
(PSE&G Real Estate), Rich Dwyer (PSE&G Public Affairs)
MEETING MINUTES
On Friday, September 6, 2022, a coordination meeting was held between the TYLin, and PSE&G to conduct
initial coordination for the Concept Development phase of this project. Below is a summary of the key
discussion outcomes.
-
TYLin and PSE&G team members introduced themselves and Mike Camerlengo gave an overview of
the project sharing screens to show the general area as well as a street view showing existing
overhead utilities on the east side of Rt. 440.
-
TYLin shared rendering of a possible pedestrian bridge which showed the extents of an access ramp
which would extend on the east side of Rt. 440 noting that this ramp structure, if incorporated into
the project, would limit the area where utility poles could be relocated.
-
Michael Camerlengo noted that TYLin will need assistance from PSE&G in determining a preliminary
utility relocation cost for each of the developed alternatives.
-
If the utilities need to be relocated, one option would be to relocate the poles and overhead utilities
further east but keep them aerial, and a second option would be to relocate the utilities
underground.
-
Jeanna DeSimone noted that if the electric needed to be relocated, PSE&G would have to remove 13
and 26 so the only option may be to go underground because there is limited ROW to the east.
-
TYLin will be sending out the Utility Contact Letter No. 1 early next week. Doug Kuenzle and
Mauricio Torres both confirmed their physical mailing addresses for TYLin to use on the letterhead.
o Electric can be sent to Doug Kuenzle: 325 County Ave., Seacaucus, NJ 07094
o Gas can be sent to Mauricio Torres: 444 St. Pauls Ave., Jersey City, NJ 07306
-
Mauricio Torres noted that he believes that the gas facilities in the area are located under the
roadway, but this will be confirmed in the response to Utility Contact Letter No. 1.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Send utility contact letter to PSE&G Electric and PSE&G Gas
TYLin
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
PSE&G Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
PSE&G Coordination Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
PSE&G Coordination Meeting
Date:
Thursday, February 9, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Jeanna DeSimone (PSE&G), Douglas Kuenzle (PSE&G) Timothy Foley (PSE&G), Al Fuschetti
(PSE&G), Mike Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM), Dan Fitzwilliam (TYLin
Structures)
MEETING MINUTES
On Thursday, February 9, 2023, a coordination meeting was held between PSE&G and TYLin to discuss the
overhead utility relocation alternatives and the feasibility and impacts of each alternative. Below is a
summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Mr. Lester gave a brief overview of the project and the progress of work since the Concept
Development (CD) phase began in September 2022.
o This Concept Development study was initiated by the City of Bayonne to develop concepts for
a pedestrian bridge crossing over Route 440 in the vicinity of Goldsborough Drive and
connecting to an existing pedestrian bridge at NJ Transit’s 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail
station.
o The east landing of the bridge will be located in the grassy area between Rt. 440 NB and the
CVS parking lot. This is also where the existing overhead utilities are located.
o The TYLin team has completed the data collection phase of the CD study and is now beginning
the alternatives analysis phase.
2. There are three relocation alternatives for the overhead lines, each of which was discussed during
the meeting.
o Alternative 1: Vertical Relocation - facilities remain on same alignment but would be raised
vertically.
PSE&G noted that there are plans for adding additional PSE&G facilities to these poles,
but the timeline is not certain at this time.
With the current number of lines on the existing poles and plans for adding more lines,
it was determined that raising the aerial utilities to pass over a proposed bridge would
not be feasible as this would require 80’ utility poles.
o Alternative 2: Horizontal Relocation – poles and facilities to be moved east towards the right-
of-way (ROW) line at the edge of the CVS parking lot.
There are clearance requirements which would need to be accounted for around the
electric utilities.
•
20 feet of clearance would be required around the electric lines.
•
PSE&G would require enough clearance room to access their facilities in the
future for maintenance/replacement related work.
•
The aerial lines cannot be over the ROW without an easement.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
PSE&G Coordination Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Guying of poles also needs to be considered with this alternative. With limited room
between Rt. 440 NB and the parking lots of Lidl and CVS, a guy wire may have to go
across Rt. 440.
The material of the aerial utilities would be metal and glass and static coming off the
lines would also need to be considered.
o Alternative 3: Underground Relocation – existing facilities relocated underground, and utility
poles removed from project area.
This alternative is feasible but is likely to be the costliest alternative. The last estimate
which PSE&G prepared in 2019 was approximately $800,000.
Location would need to be well coordinated as there are existing drainage and
oil/petroleum/natural gas pipes underground immediately east of Rt. 440 NB.
3. It was noted during the meeting that PSE&G is not the only utility company on these poles and that
Verizon has utilities on these poles as well. Input regarding the relocation of Verizon’s facilities
including a cost estimate for relocating their utilities would have to be provided by Verizon.
4. PSE&G and TYLin agreed to hold another coordination meeting once the bridge alternatives are
further developed.
o At this future meeting, TYLin will provide plan views showing the limits of the proposed bridge
alternatives.
o At this future meeting, PSE&G will have a current cost estimate for horizontal relocation and
underground relocation of their existing aerial utilities.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees, Sue Mack, Andy Raichle, Phil Scott
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
PSE&G Coordination Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
PSE&G Coordination Meeting
Date:
Friday, May 12, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Timothy Foley (PSE&G), Mike Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Thursday, May 12, 2023, a coordination meeting was held between PSE&G and TYLin to discuss the
overhead utility relocation alternatives and the feasibility and impacts of each alternative. Below is a
summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Mr. Lester reviewed the previously discussed plans to relocate the aerial utilities underground to the
east, close to the edge of the CVS parking lot.
o Mr. Foley noted that PSE&G would prefer to relocate the aerial utilities to within the Rt. 440
NB roadway, beneath the right lane of Rt. 440 NB.
o He noted that the utility duct bank required would be 3’-0” by 3’-0” and could be located a
few inches to a foot to the west of the curb.
2. Mr. Foley noted that six to nine conduits would have to be brought down and relocated and that
PSE&G may need a main and a spare depending on the circuits.
3. There are three circuits on the existing poles. PSE&G would need to bring one circuit down per pole
and in the worst case scenario, they would need a spare for each circuit. The least number of poles
affected would be three to the south and three to the north. The most number of poles affected
would be six to the south and six to the north.
4. PSE&G can prepare a 60%-70% cost estimate for the cost of the underground utility relocation in a
few weeks.
5. The relocated PSE&G utilities would need to be a minimum of 1’-0” away from other utilities.
6. The previously planned addition of a 69 kV circuit in no longer in the plans for the line along Rt. 440
NB.
Appendix O
Design Communications Report
360 |
360 |
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Quality Management
Design Communications Report
PROJECT NAME: Concept Development Study in connection with the Pedestrian Bridge over Route
440 at 34th Street
DESIGNER: TYLin International
DESIGNER PROJECT MANAGER: Michael Camerlengo
BAYONNE PROJECT MANAGER: Suzanne Mack
NJDOT PROJECT MANAGER: Paul Miranda
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
2
Design
Activity
No. 2065
DCR Entry No. 1
Start Design Communications Report
Who: Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne PM), Andy Raichle (MNWE), Michael Camerlengo
(TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Prepare the Initial Design Communications Report
Decision and Reasoning – The Designer will maintain the DCR throughout the CD
phase. The Designer will submit DCR entries to the Project Manager for approval. After
approval is received, the Designer will add DCR entries to the Project’s Design
Communications Report.
Design
Activity
No. 2000
DCR Entry No. 2
Concept Development Initiated
Who: Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne PM), Andy Raichle (MNWE), Paul Miranda (NJDOT),
Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM), meeting attendees
Design Element Issue – Concept Development Initiated
Decision and Reasoning – On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 the Concept Development
phase of the project was initiated with a kick off meeting held in the Mayors Conference
Room, Bayonne Municipal Building, 630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ. In attendance were
representatives from the City of Bayonne, MNWE, TYLin, the NJDOT, NJ Transit,
Shimmick, and CME. A list of topics discussed is below.
-
Introductions
-
Project Overview
-
Scope of Work
-
Project Schedule
-
Design Standards and CAD Format
-
Project Safety Requirements
-
Administrative Items
-
Critical Success Factors & Project Vision
During the open discussion at the end of the meeting, the City of Bayonne noted two
components (listed below) for TYLin to study as part of the Concept Development phase.
-
Study the inclusion of putting chain link fencing on top of the existing concrete
median of Route 440 in order to discourage pedestrians from crossing Route 440
at grade.
-
If a fully enclosed structure is studied, consideration shall be given to snow falling
off the roof of the structure and onto Route 440.
Meeting minutes were distributed to all attendees on 9/22/22.
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3
Design
Activity
No. 2300
DCR Entry No. 3
PSE&G Coordination Meeting
Who: Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM), Dan Fitzwilliam (TYLin),
Jeanna DeSimone (PSE&G), Douglas Kuenzle (PSE&G), Timothy Foley (PSE&G), Al
Fuschetti (PSE&G)
Design Element Issue – PSE&G Coordination Meeting
Decision and Reasoning – On Thursday, February 9, 2023, a coordination meeting was
held between PSE&G and TYLin to discuss the overhead utility relocation alternatives. The
following is a summary of the major outcomes/decisions of the meeting. Meeting minutes
were prepared and distributed to meeting attendees and the City of Bayonne.
-
Three relocation alternatives were discussed for the aerial utilities on the east side
of Route 440:
-
1: Vertical relocation: With the number of lines on the existing poles and
plans to add more, it was determined that raising the aerial utilities to pass
over a proposed bridge would not be feasible as this would require 80’ poles.
-
2: Horizontal relocation: Relocating the aerial utilities away from the
proposed bridge, closer to the ROW line is feasible but clearance
requirements to the lines would need to be considered (20’ around electric
lines; enough clearance for maintenance access; and static coming off lines).
In addition, easements may be required.
-
3: Underground relocation – This alternative is feasible but would be the
costliest. Location would need to be well coordinated as there are existing
drainage and oil/petroleum/natural gas pipes nearby.
-
PSE&G noted that they are not the only utility company on these poles and that
Verizon also has facilities on these poles and input regarding the relocation of the
Verizon facilities would have to be provided by Verizon.
-
PSE&G and TYLin agreed to hold another coordination meeting once the bridge
alternatives are further developed. At this future meeting, TYLin will provide plan
views showing the limits of the proposed bridge alternatives and PSE&G will
provide an up-to-date cost estimate for the horizontal and underground relocation
of their utilities.
Design
Activity
No. 2300
DCR Entry No. 4
Quantity of Proposed Elevators on East
Landing
Who: Andy Raichle (MNWE), Sue Mack (City of Bayonne), Phill Scott (MNWE), Michael
Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Quantity of Proposed Elevators on East Landing
Decision and Reasoning – While discussing the ongoing alternatives analysis at the
February 21, 2023 progress meeting, the required number of proposed elevator cabs in
the east bridge landing was discussed. After the progress meeting in an email on March,
1, 2023, Andy Raichle confirmed that the City of Bayonne has no requirement for, and did
not want to include two elevators at the proposed east bridge landing. The alternatives
analysis will proceed with one elevator cab in the proposed east landing.
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
4
Design
Activity
No. 2300
DCR Entry No. 5
Refinement of Alternative 4
Who: Sue Mack (City of Bayonne), Andy Raichle (MNWE), Phill Scott (MNWE), Pranav
Lathia (NJDOT Structures), Josh Szulczewski (NJDOT Structures), Michael Camerlengo
(TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Modification of Alternative 4 to Non-fracture Critical Structure
Decision and Reasoning – During the Scope Team/Core Group meeting held on May 4th,
2023, representatives from the NJDOT Structures Department requested that the project
team revise Alternative 4 to not be a fracture-critical structure. It was requested that the
proposed two-girder system alternative be revised to multiple steel girders, multiple
prestressed concrete box beams, or an Inverset type superstructure alternative.
TYLin updated Alternative 4 to be a non-fracture-critical structure and left the specific
superstructure type open to be further investigated in subsequent phases of the project if
this alternative is selected as the PPA.
Design
Activity
No. 2460
DCR Entry No. 6
Format of Public Information Center
Who: Sue Mack (City of Bayonne), Andy Raichle (MNWE), Phill Scott (MNWE), Dr. Joe
Ryan (City of Bayonne), Amy Gajewski (City of Bayonne), Alphonse Major (City of
Bayonne), Joe Skillender (City of Bayonne), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester
(TYLin DPM), Sam Donovan, (Sam Schwartz)
Design Element Issue – Format of Public Information Center
Decision and Reasoning – In a coordination meeting held on June 26th, 2023 with the
City of Bayonne, TYLin, and Sam Schwartz the time, location, and format of the Public
Information Center was discussed and agreed upon.
It was decided that the Public Information Center will be held in-person at the Bayonne
Municipal Building on August 2nd, 2023 from 6:00pm to 8:00pm. The Public Information
Center will be an open format with the TYLin project team preparing display boards of the
Preliminary Preferred Alternative, preliminary detour routes, and preliminary construction
staging scheme. A PowerPoint presentation will run in the background for attendees to
view at their leisure; no formal presentation by the project team will be made. Project
handouts will be prepared with a description of the project and a link to the project
website. Attendees will be able to submit questions to the project team via the project
website.
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
5
Design
Activity
No.
DCR Entry No. 7
Project Progress Meeting #10
Who: Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New
World), Al Major (City of Bayonne), Suzanne Cavanaugh (City of Bayonne), Sean Ream
(NJDOT), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Project Progress Meeting #10
Decision and Reasoning – On Tuesday, July 18, 2023, a progress meeting was held
between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and TYLin to provide the status of the project.
Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
TYLin provided an update of activities completed since the last progress meeting including:
URAP, Complete Streets Checklist, updated to project risk register, and utility coordination.
Activities in progress include alternatives analysis (finalizing GP&E’s, progressing the ROW
and Access Impact Plan and Matrix, and finalizing the alternatives analysis report)
Activities planned for next month include issuing the CD CRAW minutes, submitting the draft
alternatives analysis report, submitting the draft CD Report, holding the PIC, and attending
the City Council meeting.
Open discussion topics included the schedule to finish the project through mid-September,
discussion of the upcoming PIC, and scheduling of the IRC meeting.
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
6
Design
Activity
No. 2460
DCR Entry No. 8
Public Information Center
Who: Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Dr. Joe Ryan (City of
Bayonne), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Public Information Center
Decision and Reasoning – On Wednesday, August 2nd, 2023 from 6:00pm-8:00pm, an
in-person Public Information Center (PIC) was held at the Bayonne Municipal Building at
630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ 07002.
Team members from TYLin and their public outreach subconsultant Sam Schwartz were
present to present the project to the public and answer questions. Also present were
representatives from the City of Bayonne. Six display boards were set up showing a rendering
of the Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA), descriptive details and a plan, elevation, and
section of the PPA, constructability analysis, and preliminary detour routes. A rolling
presentation was displayed in the background throughout the PIC with additional project
information. Project handout sheets with information and a link to the project website were
distributed to attendees. Approximately 29 members of the public attended.
A summary of the PIC was prepared and submitted to the City for record on August 17th,
2023. A copy of the PIC summary is included in the appendix of the CD Report.
Design
Activity
No. 2570
DCR Entry No. 9
Prepare Draft CD Report
Who: Sue Mack (Bayonne), John Pavlovich (City of Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New
World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin
DPM)
Design Element Issue – Submission of the Draft CD Report to the City of Bayonne
Decision and Reasoning – On Thursday, August 24th, 2023 TYLin electronically
submitted the first draft of the Concept Development Report to the City of Bayonne for
their review and comment.
Design
Activity
No. 2570
DCR Entry No. 10
Prepare Draft CD Report
Who: Paul Miranda (NJDOT Local Aid), Sean Ream (NJDOT BEPR), Sue Mack (Bayonne),
Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo
(TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Submission of the Draft CD Report to the NJDOT
Decision and Reasoning – On Tuesday, September 12th, 2023 TYLin electronically
submitted the first draft of the Concept Development Report to the New Jersey
Department of Transportation for their review and comment.
Project Name: Concept Development Study in connection to the Pedestrian
Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
7
Design
Activity
No. 2580
DCR Entry No. 11
Review Draft CD Report and Address
Comments
Who: Paul Miranda (NJDOT Local Aid), Sean Ream (NJDOT BEPR), Walid Jawawdeh
(NJDOT), Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New
World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Receipt of Comments from NJDOT on Draft CD Report
Decision and Reasoning – On Friday, October 13th, 2023 TYLin received comments on
the Draft CD Report from Mr. Walid Jawawdeh from the NJDOT’s Bureau of Safety,
Bicycle, & Pedestrian Programs.
Design
Activity
No. 2580
DCR Entry No. 12
Review Draft CD Report and Address
Comments
Who: Paul Miranda (NJDOT Local Aid), Sean Ream (NJDOT BEPR), Nabil Ayoub (NJDOT),
Chi Wa Chen (NJDOT), Kimberly Sharp (NJDOT), Mohab Hussein (NJDOT), Sue Mack
(Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Michael
Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Receipt of Comments from NJDOT on Revised Draft CD Report
Decision and Reasoning – On Tuesday, November 7th, 2023 TYLin submitted the
revised Draft Concept Development Report to the City of Bayonne and NJDOT for
forwarding to the FHWA for their review. This version of the Draft Concept Development
Report was prepared in response to a comment received from Mr. Chi Wa Chan from the
NJDOT’s Geotechnical Engineering Unit on November 1st, 2023.
Design
Activity
No. 2600
DCR Entry No. 13
FHWA Reviews and Approves CD Report
Who: Laine Rankin (NJDOT), Ebony Johnson (NJDOT), Pamela Garrett (NJDOT), Bill
McBridge (NJDOT), Sean Warren (NJDOT), Sean Ream (NJDOT BEPR), Nabil Ayoub
(NJDOT), Christina LaCorte (NJDOT), Nunzio Merla (FHWA), Sascha Frimpong (NJTPA),
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Dr. Joe Ryan (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil
Scott (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
Design Element Issue – Interagency Review Committee (IRC) Meeting
Decision and Reasoning – On Thursday, February 15th, 2024 the Interagency Review
Committee meeting was held between the FHWA, NJTPA, NJDOT, City of Bayonne, and
TYLin. TYLin presented the work performed in the Concept Development phase of the
project to the committee for their review and determination if the project can advance to
the next phase. Meeting minutes were prepared and are appended to the CD Report.
Appendix P
Resolutions of Support
360 |
368 |
Resolution of Support – City of
Bayonne Council
Interagency Review Committee (IRC)
Letter of Approval
NJ Transit Letter of Support
Appendix Q
City of Bayonne and NJDOT
Communications
370 |
360 |
378 |
Project Kickoff Meeting
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, September 6, 2022
Location:
Mayors Conference Room, Bayonne Municipal Building, 630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ
Attachments:
Meeting Agenda, Project Schedule
Attendees:
Mike Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jay Coffey (Bayonne), Lt. David J Conte (Bayonne), John Del
Colle (NJ Transit), Pat Harrison (Shimmick), Sean Kushnir (NJ Transit), Jim Lester (TYLin),
Suzanne Mack (Bayonne PM), Alphonse Major (Bayonne) Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Andy
Raichle (Matrix New World), Joe Ryan (Bayonne), Rob Russo (CME), Joseph Skillender
(Bayonne), Paul Wyckoff (NJ Transit)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, September 6, 2022, a project kickoff meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, TYLin,
the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit), and the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to initiate the Concept Development phase of
this project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
-
The meeting began with introductions of the meeting attendees.
-
Ms. Mack provided a history of the project and the project’s overview and objectives.
-
Mr. Camerlengo provided an overview of the project’s scope of services:
o Task 1 – Project Management
Project Controls:
•
TYLin will prepare and submit invoices, progress reports, and schedule updates monthly.
•
TYLin will maintain an organized approach for document control for this project.
Meetings and Coordination:
•
TYLin will set up and attend monthly progress meetings with the City and NJDOT to
provide status of project progress.
•
Towards the end of the CD Study, TYLin will schedule and attend a City Council Meeting
to present the PPA to obtain the endorsement of the City Council prior to receiving a
resolution of support.
•
Program Compliance Review Meetings
o The Program Compliance Review meetings will include the Scope Team Meeting and
Core Group Meeting. These meetings will be with the City and NJDOT Subject
Matter Experts.
•
The Scope Team Meeting will occur once the data has been collected and analyzed; the
Purpose and Need Statement is developed; and the Project Fact Sheet is developed.
The Project Fact Sheet will be discussed along with some potential alternatives.
•
The Core Group Meeting will occur once the alternatives are identified and advanced.
These alternatives will be discussed and compared at this meeting and a PPA will be
selected that best meets the Purpose and Need Statement.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
Inter-Agency Review Committee Meeting: TYLin will schedule an Inter-Agency Review
Committee Meeting with NJDOT, NJ Transit, FHWA, and City personnel to present the
CD Study and the PPA for the committee approval.
Design Communications Report (DCR): TYLin will document all major design decisions and/or
procedural modifications in the DCR. Each DCR entry will be submitted to the City for
approval.
o Task 2 – Public Outreach
Public Involvement Action Plan: The TYLin team will develop the CD Public Involvement
Action Plan early during the CD Phase and will be submitted to the City and NJDOT for
review and approval. This document will summarize the public outreach approach for the
CD Phase. Towards the end of the CD Phase, the TYLin team will develop a Public
Involvement Action Plan for the PE Phase which will be included in the CD Report as an
Appendix.
Stakeholder Coordination: The project team will attend two meetings with the project
stakeholders. The first one will occur early in the CD Phase and will introduce the project
and solicit input on the Purpose and Need Statement. The second meeting will present the
developed alternatives and solicit input on the PPA. The TYLin team will coordinate with the
City to develop a list of project stakeholders.
Public Information Center (PIC): The PIC will present the PPA to the public to obtain and
feedback they may have. It is anticipated that the PPA will occur in May 2023.
Resolutions of Support: At the end of the CD Phase, TYLin will work with the City of Bayonne
to obtain a Resolution of Support for this project.
Public Outreach Summary: The entire Public Outreach conducted during the CD Phase will
be summarized in a Public Outreach Summary which will be included in the CD Report as an
Appendix.
Project Website Development: The TYLin team will work closely with the City of Bayonne to
develop a web-based information center to aid in the project’s Public Outreach.
o Task 3 – Data Collection
One of the first tasks during the CD Phase is to collect existing documentation.
Mr. Camerlengo indicated that the team has already obtained plans and Jurisdictional Limit
Maps from NJDOT and the Site plans and CAD files for the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
development.
Mr. Camerlengo indicated that the Utility Contact Letters will be sent out in the next couple
of weeks. Mr. Camerlengo asked if the utility companies will receive PE funding for this
project. Ms. Mack stated that they will not receive PE funding.
Project Mapping and Field Survey:
•
TYLin received CAD files for the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor site development project
which has some 3D topography.
•
Subsequent to this meeting the City Engineer (CME Consulting and Municipal
Engineers) provided a 3D cad file for Route 440.
•
The TYLin team will review the compiled information and develop a plan for the
additional survey required and conduct this field survey as early as possible in the CD
Phase. The TYLin team will apply for a Highway Occupancy Permit with NJDOT
immediately.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
Mr. Raichle requested that TYLin check with their survey sub consultant to see if they
can limit the amount of on-the-ground survey work. If possible, the City would prefer if
the supplemental survey be acquired aerially.
•
Ms. Mack indicated that, for any required field work, TYLin should coordinate with Lt.
David Conte from the Bayonne Police Department so the Police Department is aware of
any work going on.
Identify Site Resources: The TYLin team will perform an Environmental Screening to identify
any potential environmental fatal flaws.
Evaluate Site Deficiencies: Once all the existing data is collected, the TYLin team will
evaluate any site deficiencies.
Purpose and Need Statement: Through collaboration with the project team and
stakeholders, a clear and concise Purpose and Need Statement will be developed.
Existing Conditions Documentation: The existing conditions and assessment will be
summarized in the Project Fact Sheet. This information will also be included in the CD
Report.
o Task 4 – Alternatives Analysis
Develop Engineering Alternatives: Mr. Lester presented the three conceptual alternatives
which TYLin included in their Technical Proposal. He explained that these alternatives will be
refined and advanced for consideration. The alternatives include the following:
•
Alternative 1: Single-Span Truss
•
Alternative 2: Two-Span Sleek Concrete
•
Alternative 3: Goldsborough Drive At-Grade Crossing: TYLin understands that the
preference is to provide a pedestrian bridge that crosses Route 440. However, at-grade
intersection improvements at the Route 440/Goldsborough intersection will also be
analyzed to include in the Alternatives Matrix for comparison purposes.
•
Ms. Mack noted that we may want to consider including some at-grade crossing
improvements at Goldsborough Drive even if a bridge alternative is selected as the
Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA).
Mr. Lester described some design constraints that will be considered in the development of
the alternatives and selection of the PPA. These include tying into the existing pier on NJ
Transit property; potential for construction in the median; existing underground and
overhead utilities; sight distance at the Goldsborough Drive intersection; and limited Right
of Way (ROW) on the east side.
Alternative Impact Assessment: TYLin will assess each developed alternative to determine
their pros and cons as it relates to meeting the Purpose and Need Statement. This
assessment will include preparing the alternative impact assessment; selection of the PPA;
alternatives analysis documentation; and risk management review and documentation.
Selection of the PPA: Once the alternatives are developed, the TYLin team, in collaboration
with the city, NJDOT, NJ Transit and the project stakeholders, will select the PPA that best
satisfies the Purpose and Need Statement.
Alternatives Analysis Documentation: The developed alternatives, their analysis, and the
selection of the PPA will be summarized in an Alternatives Analysis Report.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Risk Management Review and Documentation: TYLin will develop a Risk Register that will be
updated during the CD Phase and will be a living document which will get updated as the
project progresses through the PE and FD phases.
o Task 5 – Documentation
Concept Development Plans: TYLin will prepare plans for the PPA, and this will be included
in the CD Report as part of an Appendix.
Project Cost Estimate: TYLin will develop a preliminary construction cost estimate for each
alternative to aid in the assessment of alternatives leading to the selection of the PPA.
PE Next Steps/Tasks: Once the PPA is determined, TYLin will develop the PE Scope
Statement, outlining the anticipated scope of work for the PE Phase. This will be included in
the CD Report as an Appendix.
Concept Development Report: TYLin will summarize the entire CD Study in the Concept
Development Report.
PowerPoint Presentation: At the end of the CD Phase, TYLin will prepare a PowerPoint
Presentation summarizing the CD Phase for the City’s future use.
NEPA classification and documentation: this will involve confirming the anticipated
environmental document(s) required for this project and will be included in the CD Report.
PE Scope Statement: Will be prepared towards the end of the project and included as an
appendix to the CD Report.
Mr. Camerlengo presented a list of deliverables, including the CD Schedule, Design
Communications Report, CD Public Involvement Action Plan, Project Fact Sheet, Alternatives
Matrix, Preliminary Detour and Construction Plans, Reasonable Assurance of Design
Exception Approval Memo, ROW & Access Impact Plan and Matrix, Concept Development
Report, and a Project Power Point Presentation.
-
Mr. Camerlengo gave an overview of the project schedule noting that the anticipated duration of
the CD phase is 12 months, and he noted some key project milestones.
-
Mr. Camerlengo stated that AASHTO and NJDOT design standards would be followed and that
MicroStation would be the CAD platform utilized and that drawing production would be in
accordance with the NJDOT CADD Standards Manual.
-
Mr. Camerlengo discussed the project Safety Requirements: NJDOT Highway occupancy permits will
be required for any work being conducted along Route 440.
o Mr. Harrison noted that safety training would be required for any field work in the vicinity of the
Light Rail track, specifically near the existing west pier.
-
Mr. Camerlengo discussed the project’s administrative items:
o Primary Contacts and Communication: The primary contacts for TYLin are Mr. Camerlengo and
Mr. Lester and for the City of Bayonne they are Ms. Mack and Mr. Raichle.
Mike Camerlengo (TYLin PM) michael.camerlengo@tylin.com (908) 441-7177
Jim Lester (TYLin DPM) jim.lester@tylin.com (908) 441-7143
Sue Mack (City of Bayonne) smack@baynj.org cc: bayonneplanner@gmail.com (201)858-
6138
Andy Raichle (Matrix New World) araichle@mnwe.com
Sue Mack noted that she would provide the contact information for everyone at the
meeting.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Progress Meetings: Mr. Camerlengo reiterated that monthly progress meetings will be held. Ms.
Mack and TYLin will coordinate on a date, time, and invitee list for recurring progress meetings.
o Invoicing Requirements: Ms. Mack will send TYLin a sample invoice for their formatting
purposes.
-
Critical Success Factors & Project Vision: Mr. Camerlengo opened the discussion for the City to share
their vision for the project and what factors they believe will make the project successful. Some of
the key points discussed include the following.
o One main point conveyed was that even with a safer crossing, people need to be encouraged to
use the bridge rather that crossing Rt. 440 across traffic.
o The City wants people to be aware of and informed about the project.
o Investigate the possibility of having a second landing on the west side of Rt. 440 which is
separate from the existing pedestrian structure.
o It was noted that the City does not have traffic data (both pedestrian and vehicular) for the area.
Having this data would be very beneficial for them to understand and frame the problem.
o There are future plans for a ferry service in the area east of Rt. 440 and this structure could also
be a connector for people using the ferry service.
o With Rt. 440 being a major commercial route, meeting the required minimum vertical clearance
is critical.
o Fencing should be provided for safety, and if a fully enclosed structure is studied, consideration
should be given to snow falling off the roof onto Rt. 440.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project Kickoff Meeting Agenda
Page | 1
Project Kickoff Meeting Agenda
Date:
Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 11:00am
Location:
Bayonne Municipal Building, 630 Avenue C, Bayonne NJ; Mayors Conference Room
Subject:
Project Kickoff Meeting
1.
Welcome/Introductions
2.
Project Overview & Objectives
a. Project Overview
b. Project Objectives
3.
Project History and Setting
4.
Project Need
5.
Scope of Services
a. Task 1 – Project Management
b. Task 2 – Public Outreach
c. Task 3 – Data Collection
d. Task 4 – Alternatives Analysis
e. Task 5 – Documentation
6.
Project Schedule
a. Critical Path Activities
7.
Technical Requirements
8.
Safety Requirements
9.
Administrative Items
a. Primary Contacts & Communication
b. Progress Meetings
c. Invoicing Requirements
10. Critical Success Factors & Project Vision
11. Open Discussion
Activity ID
Activity Name
Original
Duration
Start
Finish
Bayonne
BayonnePed-2021RFP-CD Concept De
250.0d 2022-Sep-06
2023-Sep-07
A2000
CD Initiated
0.0d 2022-Sep-06
A2045
Create CD Schedule
5.0d 2022-Sep-06
2022-Sep-12
A2105
Perform Supplemental Data Collection
10.0d 2022-Sep-06
2022-Sep-19
A2030
Develop Community Profile
15.0d 2022-Sep-06
2022-Sep-26
A2100
Conduct Traffic Counts
20.0d 2022-Sep-06
2022-Oct-03
A2170
Obtain Crash Records
20.0d 2022-Sep-06
2022-Oct-03
A2115
Prepare CD Mapping
15.0d 2022-Sep-20
2022-Oct-11
A2120
Conduct Field Inventory of Physical Condition
15.0d 2022-Sep-20
2022-Oct-11
A2110
Forcast Travel Projections
10.0d 2022-Oct-04
2022-Oct-18
A2135
Perform Environmental Screening
20.0d 2022-Sep-20
2022-Oct-18
A2125
Identify Substandard Design Elements
10.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Oct-25
A2175
Prepare Utility Risk Assessment Plan
10.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Oct-25
A2230
Conduct H & H Analysis
10.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Oct-25
A2235
Conduct ITS Needs Assessment
10.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Oct-25
A2210
Conduct Scour & Seismic Retrofit Analysis
10.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Oct-25
A2205
Conduct Existing Traffic Analysis
10.0d 2022-Oct-19
2022-Nov-02
A2155
Send Utility Contact Letter
20.0d 2022-Oct-12
2022-Nov-09
A2140
Review Environmental Screening
15.0d 2022-Oct-19
2022-Nov-09
A2200
Prepare Crash Analysis & Crash Diagram
15.0d 2022-Oct-26
2022-Nov-17
A2240
Prepare Project Fact Sheet
5.0d 2022-Nov-10
2022-Nov-17
A2250
Prepare Draft Purpose & Need Statement
5.0d 2022-Nov-10
2022-Nov-17
A2260
Hold Scope Team Meeting
10.0d 2022-Nov-18
2022-Dec-02
A2280
Complete Purpose & Need Statement
5.0d 2022-Dec-05
2022-Dec-09
A2290
Purpose & Need Statement Completed
0.0d
2022-Dec-09
A2300
Develop Alternatives
20.0d 2022-Dec-12
2023-Jan-10
A2320
Develop Preliminary Detour & Construction St
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2330
Perform Risk Assessment on Alternatives
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2340
Develop Preliminary Construction Cost Estima
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2350
Conduct Proposed Traffic Analysis
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2360
Obtain Reasonable Assurance of Design Exc
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2380
Prepare Alternative Matrix
5.0d 2023-Jan-19
2023-Jan-25
A2370
Perform SWM Analysis
10.0d 2023-Jan-11
2023-Jan-25
A2310
Obtain Stakeholder Input on Developed Altern
40.0d 2022-Dec-12
2023-Feb-08
A2415
Conduct CD Constructibility Risk Analysis
10.0d 2023-Jan-26
2023-Feb-08
A2420
Revise Alternatives Matrix
10.0d 2023-Feb-09
2023-Feb-23
A2430
Hold Core Group Meeting
20.0d 2023-Feb-24
2023-Mar-23
A2440
Hold Local Officials Briefing
20.0d 2023-Mar-24
2023-Apr-21
A2510
Confirm Environmental Document
5.0d 2023-Apr-24
2023-Apr-28
A2035
Prepare CD Public Involvement Action Plan
150.0d 2022-Sep-27
2023-May-05
A2520
Prepare PE Scope Statement
10.0d 2023-Apr-24
2023-May-05
A2500
Complete PPA Constructibility-Risk Report
10.0d 2023-Apr-24
2023-May-05
A2450
Hold Town Council Presentation
20.0d 2023-Apr-24
2023-May-19
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
2023
2024
2023-Sep-07, BayonnePed-2021RFP-CD Concept Development - City of Bayonne Pedestrian Brid
CD Initiated, 2022-Sep-06
Create CD Schedule
Perform Supplemental Data Collection
Develop Community Profile
Conduct Traffic Counts
Obtain Crash Records
Prepare CD Mapping
Conduct Field Inventory of Physical Conditions
Forcast Travel Projections
Perform Environmental Screening
Identify Substandard Design Elements
Prepare Utility Risk Assessment Plan
Conduct H & H Analysis
Conduct ITS Needs Assessment
Conduct Scour & Seismic Retrofit Analysis
Conduct Existing Traffic Analysis
Send Utility Contact Letter
Review Environmental Screening
Prepare Crash Analysis & Crash Diagram
Prepare Project Fact Sheet
Prepare Draft Purpose & Need Statement
Hold Scope Team Meeting
Complete Purpose & Need Statement
Purpose & Need Statement Completed,
Develop Alternatives
Develop Preliminary Detour & Construction Staging Plans
Perform Risk Assessment on Alternatives
Develop Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate
Conduct Proposed Traffic Analysis
Obtain Reasonable Assurance of Design Exception Approval
Prepare Alternative Matrix
Perform SWM Analysis
Obtain Stakeholder Input on Developed Alternatives
Conduct CD Constructibility Risk Analysis
Revise Alternatives Matrix
Hold Core Group Meeting
Hold Local Officials Briefing
Confirm Environmental Document
Prepare CD Public Involvement Action Plan
Prepare PE Scope Statement
Complete PPA Constructibility-Risk Report
Hold Town Council Presentation
BayonnePed-2021RFP-CD
Concept Development - City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
CD PROJECT SCHEDULE
100 Enterprise Drive, Rockaway, NJ 07866
2022-Aug-31
Page 1 of 2
Actual Level of Effort
Actual Work
Remaining Work
Critical Remaining Work
Milestone
summary
Activity ID
Activity Name
Original
Duration
Start
Finish
A2540
Prepare CD ROW & Access Impact Plan & Sta
10.0d 2023-May-08
2023-May-19
A2550
Prepare CD ROW & Access Cost Estimate
15.0d 2023-May-22
2023-Jun-12
A2460
Hold Public Information Center
30.0d 2023-May-22
2023-Jul-05
A2470
Finalize PPA
10.0d 2023-Jul-06
2023-Jul-19
A2480
PPA Selected
0.0d
2023-Jul-19
A2570
Prepare Draft CD Report
15.0d 2023-Jun-28
2023-Jul-19
A2065
Design Communications Report
220.0d 2022-Sep-06
2023-Jul-26
A2485
Investigate Need for Traffic Regulation Orders
10.0d 2023-Jul-20
2023-Aug-02
A2580
Review Draft CD Report and Address Comme
15.0d 2023-Jul-20
2023-Aug-09
A2575
Attend Interagency Review Committee Meetin
15.0d 2023-Jul-20
2023-Aug-09
A2600
FHWA Reviews & Approves CD Report
15.0d 2023-Aug-10
2023-Aug-30
A2630
Finalize CD Report
5.0d 2023-Aug-31
2023-Sep-07
A2950
CD Complete
0.0d
2023-Sep-07
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
2023
2024
Prepare CD ROW & Access Impact Plan & Statemenf
Prepare CD ROW & Access Cost Estimate
Hold Public Information Center
Finalize PPA
PPA Selected,
Prepare Draft CD Report
Design Communications Report
Investigate Need for Traffic Regulation Orders
Review Draft CD Report and Address Comments
Attend Interagency Review Committee Meeting
FHWA Reviews & Approves CD Report
Finalize CD Report
CD Complete,
BayonnePed-2021RFP-CD
Concept Development - City of Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
CD PROJECT SCHEDULE
100 Enterprise Drive, Rockaway, NJ 07866
2022-Aug-31
Page 2 of 2
Actual Level of Effort
Actual Work
Remaining Work
Critical Remaining Work
Milestone
summary
Site Visit and Progress Meeting #1
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Site Visit and Progress Meeting #1 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Site Visit and Progress Meeting #1 Minutes
Date:
Wednesday, October 12, 2022
Location:
Project Site near Intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM),
Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Wednesday, October 12, 2022, a site visit and progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne
and TYLin to provide the status of the project, and gain familiarity with the project site. Below is a summary
of the key discussion outcomes.
-
The meeting agenda was distributed, and Mr. Camerlengo began by discussing the status of the
project noting items that are complete or are in progress. A summary of the completed activities
and activities in progress is as follows:
o Activities completed to date:
The CD phase was initiated with the project kickoff meeting held on 9/6
The CD schedule was submitted as an attachment to the minutes of the kickoff meeting on
9/22
Crash records for the project area were obtained from the City on 10/6
A field visit was conducted on 9/28 to gain an understanding of the project area, perform
field verification, gather additional information, and take photos at the project site
Utility contact letters were sent on 9/28
o Activities in progress
Perform Supplemental Data Collection: TYLin has already compiled information from the
City and NJDOT. However TYLin is still hoping to acquire the following from the City, if
available:
•
Traffic Impact Studies
o Mr. Raichle noted that there should be traffic impact studies available for each
development in the immediate area (Costco, CVS, Lidl, etc.), he will search for this
information and provide to TYLin if available.
•
Stormwater Management Report/Plans
•
Geotechnical/Geological Info and Soil Borings
o Mr. Raichel believes that the geotechnical conditions for the proposed abutment on
the east side should be favorable. He noted that the soil in the area is not the fill
that was used to create the Military Ocean Bay Terminal Bayonne (MOTB) and that
he believes the bedrock should be relatively shallow.
o Mr. Raichle will attempt to locate any geotechnical/geological related reports or
plans from the developments in the area and send to TYLin.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Site Visit and Progress Meeting #1 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
Tax Maps
o Mr. Raichle will provide TYLin with access to the site used to obtain tax maps in the
City. He also mentioned that the NJDOT provided NJ Transit with an easement over
Rt. 440 for the pedestrian bridge and that this information should be available on
plans.
•
Construction Plans for Goldsborough Drive Intersection
Develop Community Profile and CD Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP)
•
TYLin will submit the CD PIAP to the City this week
Conduct Traffic Counts
Prepare CD Mapping
Prepare Project Fact Sheet
-
There was a discussion on additional utilities that TYLin noticed on their field visit which they were
working on contacting
o Hess has a petroleum pipeline running along Route 440 NB
o Mr. Pavlovich previously noted that Spectrum may have utilities in the area
o Spectra Energy’s Texas Eastern Transmission Algonquin Gas Transmission may have utilities in
the area along Goldsborough Drive and running beneath the CVS and Lidl parking lots
Mr. Raichle confirmed that these utilities were directionally drilled under the CVS and Lidl
parking lots
-
Mr. Raichle noted that the gas lines running along Rt. 440 NB should be located in the Goldsborough
Drive intersection improvement plans
o Mr. Pavlovich should have these plans to send us. If not, Mr. Raichle may have access to them
o TYLin will reach out to Mr. Pavlovich and request these plans if he has them
-
While discussing existing utility conflicts and available ROW on the east side of Rt. 440, Mr.
Camerlengo noted that TYLin would consider both aboveground relocation and underground
relocation of the overhead utilities in order to make room for the proposed pedestrian bridge
-
Mr. Camerlengo asked if the City was still entertaining the idea of potentially moving the proposed
location of the pedestrian bridge to the south, closer to 32nd Street but the City is not in favor of this
noting that it was not ideal and would require additional coordination with NJ Transit
-
Ms. Mack noted that in addition to funding from the NJTPA, the City of Bayonne has bonded a
certain amount of money for the bridge project
-
Mr. Camerlengo noted that TYLin is planning to hold the first stakeholder meeting in November to
introduce the project to the stakeholders and get their input on the Purpose and Need Statement
o Ms. Mack and Mr. Raichle suggested this meeting be held virtually in the first week of
November
o TYLin will handle scheduling this meeting and sending a meeting invitation to the invitees and
will coordinate with Ms. Mack for invitees from the NJDOT and NJ Transit
-
Mr. Camerlengo discussed scheduling recurring monthly progress meetings to start in November.
The meeting will be scheduled for the third Tuesday of each month at 2:00pm starting in November
o TYLin will send out a meeting invite to Ms. Mack and Mr. Raichle to get the meeting on
everyone’s calendar and Ms. Mack will invite NJDOT and NJ Transit
-
Mr. Camerlengo noted that TYLin would like to discuss setting up the project website. Ms. Mack
expressed interest in this getting set up as well.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Site Visit and Progress Meeting #1 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o TYLin will have the project website created on a separate domain and provide the City with a
link so that it can be reviewed and ultimately posted on the City’s website
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Submit the CD PIAP to the City of Bayonne.
Mr. Camerlengo
2
Request plans for Goldsborough Drive intersection construction from
Mr. Pavlovich.
Mr. Lester
3
Send geotechnical/geological related reports and/or plans for the
developments in the project area (if available) to TYLin.
Mr. Raichle
4
Send traffic impact studies for developments in project area (if
available) to TYLin.
Mr. Raichle
5
Provide TYLin with access to the system to obtain Tax Maps for the City
of Bayonne.
Mr. Raichle
6
Begin work to schedule the first stakeholder meeting in the first week
of November.
Mr. Lester
7
Schedule recurring progress meetings on the third Tuesday of the
month at 2:00pm and send invite to Ms. Mack and Mr. Raichle.
Mr. Camerlengo
8
Initiate development of the project website.
Mr. Lester
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #2
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #2 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #2 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, November 15, 2022
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), John Pavlovich (Bayonne), Michael
Camerlengo (TYLin PM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, November 15, 2022, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne and TYLin to
provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
-
Environmental Screening: Mr. Camerlengo indicated that TYLin is reviewing the draft and will submit
to the City in a couple of weeks
-
Project Fact Sheet
o 75% complete. Outstanding items include
Traffic Signal Plans from NJDOT so that the assessment of the traffic data can be performed.
•
Ms. Mack indicated she will follow up with the NJDOT
Last remaining utility responses
-
Crash Analysis and Crash Diagram: Mr. Camerlengo indicated that TYLin received the crash reports
from the City of Bayonne PD and there were 133 crashes between 32nd St. and Goldsborough Dr.
over the last three years (one of which involved a pedestrian)
-
Ms. Mack allowed TYLin to contact the NJDOT ITS SME directly to get input on the ITS needs
assessment. She noted that TYLin should mention that Paul Miranda is the NJDOT Local Aid PM for
this project
-
Stakeholder meeting:
o Scheduled for 10:00am on Friday, December 9
o Mr. Raichle requested that TYLin submit a PowerPoint presentation soon for review
o Mr. Camerlengo presented the project contact list and invitees to the meeting were decided. It
was also requested that the NJTPA, Conrail, and the Mayor of Bayonne be invited. Ms. Mack will
provide their contact information
o TYLin will send the invite letter to the City for their review. In the email, TYLin will list the
attendees that were agreed to and mention that the NJTPA and Conrail will be added so that
Ms. Mack can provide their contact information
o Ms. Mack asked that Sam Schwartz contact her as soon as possible to finalize the rest of the
stakeholder list. TYLin will facilitate this call
-
Project Website: TYLin will send the meeting attendees and Joseph Ryan the link to the website to
review and provide input
-
Scope Team Meeting: Ms. Mack will work with the NJDOT to schedule this. In the meantime, TYLin
will get the Project Fact Sheet completed and finalized
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #2 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
-
Open Discussion
o Mr. Pavlovich asked for the traffic counts that were compiled for Route 440 and Goldsborough
Drive and on Goldsborough Drive. Raw data is okay if that’s all TYLin has or anything with the
peak hour.
o Mr. Pavlovich asked that TYLin ensures that the Design Communications Report is updated
regularly.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Follow up with the NJDOT on request for traffic signal plans.
Ms. Mack
2
Contact NJDOT ITS SME for input on ITS needs assessment.
Mr. Lester
3
Provide contact info for NJTPA, Conrail, and Mayor of Bayonne invitees
to the Stakeholder Meeting #1.
Ms. Mack
4
Send Stakeholder Meeting #1 invitation letter to Bayonne for review.
Mr. Lester
5
Facilitate call between Bayonne and Sam Schwartz to finalize contacts
for Stakeholder Meeting #1.
Mr. Lester
6
Send link to the project website to the meeting attendees for their
review and input.
Mr. Lester
7
Initiate discussion of scheduling the Scope Team Meeting with the
NJDOT.
Ms. Mack
8
Send traffic count data to Mr. Pavlovich
Mr. Lester
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Mike Camerlengop at (908)
441-7177 or at Michael.Camerlengo@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments
are received, then this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Michael P. Camerlengo
Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #3
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #3 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #3 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, December 20, 2022
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM),
Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne and TYLin to
provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
-
Activities completed since last progress meeting
o Completed crash analysis, launched project website, prepared draft purpose and need
statement, and held Stakeholder Meeting #1.
-
Activities in progress
o Project Fact Sheet: Waiting on the traffic signal plans. Ms. Mack asked TYLin to contact Noel
Barbosa at the NJDOT directly to get these plans.
o Scope Team Meeting: Mr. Camerlengo sent emails to Paul Miranda to schedule. Mr. Miranda
will be discussing with Mr. Nabil Ayoub.
o Environmental Document is under review by TYLin and once finished, will be sent to the City
for review.
o ITS Needs assessment: Phone call into NJDOT Mobility Systems, will follow up on Wednesday
12/21 if no response is received beforehand.
-
Activities planned for next month
o Finish existing traffic analysis, finish environmental document, finish ITS needs assessment,
issue minutes from Stakeholder Meeting #1, attend Scope Team Meeting, begin development
of alternatives.
-
Traffic Signal Plans for Existing Traffic Analysis
o Ms. Mack asked that TYLin contact the NJDOT directly to try and acquire these plans.
-
Invoicing
o Mr. Camerlengo to look into the third invoice and ensure that it gets sent to Ms. Mack. Ms.
Mack confirmed that she received the DCR Entries for both of the two prior invoices. The
same DCR Entries will be submitted with each subsequent invoice and any updates added.
-
Open Discussion
o Royal Caribbean noted to the City that they would want to add their company logo to the
proposed bridge.
o Mr. Raichle noted that the City would be interested in TYLin studying the possibility of adding
signage to the bridge, such as a welcome sign. Mr. Camerlengo noted that TYLin will include
this component as part of the alternatives analysis.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #3 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o TYLin’s invoices should continue to be emailed to Ms. Maureen Pona.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Contact Noel Barbosa at the NJDOT to request that the traffic signal
plans be resent.
J. Lester
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #5
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #5 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #5 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, February 21, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, February 21, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne and TYLin to
provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting
o Obtained traffic signal plans from NJDOT.
o Conducted field visit to supplement traffic signal information.
o Conducted existing traffic analysis.
o Added geotechnical sections to the Project Fact Sheet.
o Issued minutes from Stakeholder Meeting #1.
o Began alternatives analysis.
o Held coordination meeting with PSE&G.
2. Activities in progress
o Preparation of Environmental Screening: revisions being made by subconsultant.
o Preparation of Project Fact Sheet.
o Conduct ITS Needs Assessment: Multiple requests in with NJDOT Mobility Systems for
information. No response received on plan for future ITS needs.
o Scope Team Meeting: still working on getting this scheduled.
3. Activities planned for next month
o Forecast travel projections.
o Conduct H&H analysis.
o Schedule a combined Scope Team and Core Group meeting.
o Complete the purpose and need statement.
o Complete alternatives development.
o Obtain stakeholder input on developed alternatives.
o Conduct CD Constructability Risk Analysis Workshop.
4. Discussion of Alternatives Analysis
o Jim Lester presented the preliminary alternatives matrix and discussed the alternatives which
TYLin has started analyzing.
o TYLin broke down Alternative 1 (Single Span Truss) and Alternative 2 (Two-span sleek
concrete) into four sub-components:
Ramp & covered bridge.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #5 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Ramp & uncovered bridge.
Stairs/elevator & covered bridge.
Stairs/elevator & uncovered bridge.
o Jim Lester also presented the preliminary General Plan and Elevation for Alternatives 1 and 2
showing the impacts of the ADA compliant ramp and noted that its limits may extend past the
existing right-of-way (ROW).
Andy Raichle noted that acquiring ROW from a newly developed property would not be
ideal.
TYLin will revisit the ramp alignment and design to see if any adjustment can be made to
bring it within the existing ROW.
o Jim Lester presented the relative cost of each alternative showing which alternatives TYLin
believed would be the least to most expensive.
Sue Mack and Andy Raichle requested that TYLin provide construction cost estimates for
each alternative being developed.
It was also requested that TYLin keep the low-cost simple bridge alternative (Alternative
4) on the alternatives matrix for comparison purposes.
o Sue Mack asked for clarification on how many elevators would be required.
Jim Lester clarified that we initially planned on one new elevator on the east side, but
that there could be a requirement for two elevators on the east side if one ever needed
to be taken out for maintenance. TYLin will confirm if this is a requirement or not. He
also clarified that the one existing elevator on the west side at the existing pedestrian
facility on NJ Transit’s property would remain.
o In discussing utility relocation costs, Sue Mack requested that TYLin ask PSE&G about partial
relocation of some aerial utilities underground.
o Concluding the review of the preliminary alternatives matrix and plans, the City and TYLin
agreed to progress the following alternatives for more refined analysis.
Alternative 1.B.1 – Single span steel truss, stairs/elevator, covered
Alternative 2.B.2 – Two span sleek concrete, stairs/elevator, uncovered
Alternative 3 – At-grade crossing at Goldsborough Drive
Alternative 4 – Through-girder simple bridge
5. Scheduling of Stakeholder Meeting #2 for beginning of April
o TYLin will work with Sam Schwartz to try and schedule the second stakeholder meeting for the
first week of April. TYLin will coordinate with the City to confirm a date and time before
sending an invitation.
6. Scheduling of combined Scope Team/Core Group Meeting with NJDOT in mid-April
o Sue Mack requested TYLin send her a list of NJDOT departments and individuals who typically
attend the Scope Team Meeting or Core Group Meeting and she would reach out to Paul
Miranda, Deven Patel, and Nabil Ayoub to request a meeting. She agreed that we could
attempt to schedule a combined meeting.
7. Open Discussion
o Sue Mack requested that TYLin submit an updated DCR entry with their next invoice.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #5 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o TYLin will complete the alternatives analysis prior to the Stakeholder Meeting #2 and present
to the City for input. TYLin will present to the City at the next Progress Meeting On March 21,
2023.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Revisit ramp alignment to see if alignment can be fine-tuned to bring
the ramp within the existing ROW.
TYLin
2
Confirm if two proposed elevators are required for maintenance
reasons.
TYLin
3
Progress refinement of alternatives 1.B.1, 2.B.2, 3 and 4 and present to
the City at March 21, 2023 Progress Meeting.
TYLin
4
Initiate coordination with Sam Schwartz to schedule Stakeholder
Meeting #2 for beginning of April.
TYLin
5
Send Sue Mack a list of NJDOT Departments/Individuals that should be
invited to the Scope Team/Core Group Meeting.
TYLin
6
Submit a new DCR entry with the next invoice.
TYLin
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #6
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #6 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #6 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, March 21, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim
Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne and TYLin to
provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting
o Progressed Alternatives
Developed GP&E drawings for each alternative.
Developed construction cost estimates for each alternative.
Progressing construction staging and detour plan.
Updated alternatives matrix.
o Scheduled Stakeholder Meeting #2 for 4/6/23 @ 10:00am
o Submitted initial draft of the Project Fact Sheet and list of SMEs to the City on 2/27/23.
2. Activities in progress
o Updating Project Fact Sheet based on City’s comments.
o Updating Environmental Screening Report based on City’s census comments.
o Updating Community Profile based on City’s census comments.
o Scope Team/Core Group Meeting: Any response from NJDOT?
Ms. Mack has been contacting individuals at the NJDOT to attempt to schedule the
meeting but is not getting a response. She will continue her efforts and reach out to
other individuals if needed.
o Alternatives Analysis
Continue refining GP&Es, construction staging and detour plans, and risk register.
Progressing Alternatives Analysis Report.
3. Activities planned for next month
o Schedule a combined Scope Team/Core Group Meeting.
o Progress Develop Alternatives and corresponding sub-activities.
o Progress H&H analysis.
o Obtain Stakeholder Input on Developed Alternatives (Hold Stakeholder Meeting #2).
o Schedule CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop (CRAW).
The City will have a discussion internally to see if they think this is needed.
4. Discussion of Alternatives Analysis
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #6 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Mr. Lester presented the alternatives matrix and the general plan and elevation drawings for
each of the four alternatives.
o TYLin will reach out to NJ Transit to determine if the work that needs to be performed on their
property is considered an easement or a right of entry permit.
o TYLin will investigate levelling the bridge for alternatives 2 and 3 in elevation view.
o During the review of the alternatives matrix, it was clarified that the estimated construction
costs included for alternatives 2, 3, and 4 included approximately $1.5M for utility relocations.
TYLin will revise the alternatives matrix and break out the estimate cost of utility relocations.
5. Scheduling of combined Scope Team/Core Group Meeting with NJDOT at end of April
o TYLin will revise the Project Fact Sheet to address the City’s comments and re-submit this
week. Ms. Mack will continue to work on getting a combined Scope Team and Core Group
Meeting with the NJDOT.
6. Open Discussion
o TYLin review previous invoices to ensure that labor details for any subconsultants is included.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Discuss the need for a CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop
internally and direct TYLin as to one will be required or not.
City of Bayonne
2
Contact NJ Transit to determine if the work that needs to be performed
on their property would be considered an easement or a right of entry.
TYLin
3
Investigate levelling the bridge structure for alternatives 2 and 3.
TYLin
4
Revise alternatives Matrix to break out cost estimate of utility
relocations.
TYLin
5
Revise project fact sheet to address the City’s comments and re-submit
to the City.
TYLin
6
Continue attempts to schedule a combined Scope Team/Core Group
meeting with the NJDOT.
City of Bayonne
7
Review previous invoices and ensure that labor details are included for
all subconsultant work.
TYLin
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #7
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #7 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #7 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, April 18, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, April 18, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and
TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting
o Progressed Alternatives
o Held Stakeholder Meeting #2 on 4/6/23. Minutes issued on 4/14/23
o Scheduled Scope Team/Core Group Meeting for 5/4/23 at 10:00am
2. Activities in progress
o Alternatives Analysis
Continue refining GP&E’s, construction staging and detour plans, and risk register
Continue utility coordination with PSE&G, Verizon, and Altice USA/Cablevision regarding
utility relocation alternatives.
Progress ROW/Construction Easement investigations
•
Mr. Raichle noted that there is an existing easement over Rt. 440 where the
bridge is proposed which is shown on some of the survey files. He suggested
reviewing that information as part of conducting any easement or ROW
investigations.
Progress Alternatives Analysis Report
3. Activities planned for next month
o Hold Scope Team/Core Group Meeting on 5/4/23
o Complete Develop Alternatives and corresponding sub-activities
o Schedule CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop (CRAW)
Mr. Lester, Mr. Raichle, and Mr. Miranda agreed that a CRAW in the CD phase would be
beneficial to the project. TYLin will mention the CD CRAW as a next step in the Scope
Team/Core Group meeting in May and will coordinate with the NJDOT to schedule this.
4. Open Discussion
o Jurisdiction of proposed bridge
Ownership and jurisdiction of the proposed structure was discussed briefly, and it was
agreed that further discussions between the City, NJDOT, NJ Transit, and TYLin would be
required on the topic so that a definitive statement could be included in the CD Report.
o Updates to project website
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #7 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
TYLin will have Sam Schwartz upload project photos, GP&E drawings, and renderings to
the website and password protect the website. The City can review the updated website
and once they approve of the changes, the password will be taken off and be re-opened
to the public.
o Ongoing drainage improvements near Rt. 440 and Goldsborough Dr.
Mr. Lester asked if the City or NJDOT were aware of any ongoing drainage improvement
projects near the project area, as construction equipment and drainage inlets were
recently observed in the area. TYLin would like to know if this ongoing work would
affect the Concept Development study.
Ms. Mack also noticed this work in the same area and would check internally to see if
she could find more details.
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
Direct Sam Schwartz to update the project website to include photos,
drawings, and renderings. Send the City a link to the password
protected website once updates are complete.
TYLin
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees, M. Camerlengo (TYLin PM)
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting
Minutes
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
Date:
Thursday, May 4, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
Meeting Attendance, Presentation
Attendees:
See attached
MEETING MINUTES
On Thursday, May 4, 2023, a combined Scope Team/Core Group meeting was held between the City of
Bayonne, the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), TYLin, and Malick and Scherer (M&S) to
present the project purpose and need and project goals, existing conditions, data collection, and analysis
of alternatives. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. The meeting began with introductions of the meeting attendees.
2. Ms. Mack provided an overview of the project’s history noting that this project was originally part of
the Liberty Corridor redevelopment program, and this specific project is for a pedestrian bridge
connecting the existing 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail (HBLR) station and the ongoing
development at the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH). Ms. Mack noted that the project is
currently in the Concept Development phase.
3. Mr. Raichle added that in the past ten years, there has been tremendous growth on the PABH with
both residential development and business and commercial development and an increased need for
pedestrians to cross Rt. 440 in the vicinity of Goldsborough Dr.
4. Mr. Camerlengo began the presentation:
a. The project is located in the City of Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey. The proposed
pedestrian bridge will cross over Route 440 in the vicinity of Goldsborough Drive and will attach
directly to an existing pedestrian facility at New Jersey Transit’s 34th Street HBLR station.
b. Purpose & Need and Project Goals:
•
The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting pedestrians and
bicyclists from the east side of Rt. 440 just south of Goldsborough Dr. to the west side of
Rt. 440 at the 34th Street HBLR station.
•
The project needs include the following:
o No safe pedestrian crossing in the project vicinity. Closest is at grade ~0.25 miles
south
o Increased need for residents west of Route 440 to access destinations around PABH
o Increased need for residents of PABH to access 34th Street HBLR station
•
The project goals include the following:
o Safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Route 440 in vicinity of Goldsborough Dr.
o Keep the public and stakeholders informed about the project through all phases.
o Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian crossing.
o Minimize impacts to Route 440, stakeholders, and utilities.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical underclearance and sight distance to traffic
signal.
o Minimize impacts to traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Dr. during construction.
c. Mr. Camerlengo presented the existing conditions on the project.
•
Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing
o No pedestrian crossing of Rt. 440 provided at Goldsborough Dr.
o Pedestrian Crossing provided at E 32nd St./Lefante Way ~0.25 miles south of
proposed bridge.
o Sidewalks provided on Goldsborough Dr. and Rt. 440 south of Prospect Ave./Port
Imperial Blvd. Asphalt walkway provided along Rt. 440 NB between Goldsborough Dr.
and Port Imperial Blvd.
o Mr. Raichle noted that with Royal Caribbean located at the end of the peninsula,
people take the light rail with baggage in hand, cross Rt. 440 at grade, and walk 1.5
miles to the end of the peninsula to get to the Royal Caribbean cruise line.
•
Structures
o The existing pier supporting the NJ Transit pedestrian facility includes a connection
point for a future pedestrian bridge over Rt. 440. As-built plans for the structure
show accommodations for future bearings and anchors bolts were observed
protruding out of the top of the pier during a field visit.
o Mr. Raichle noted that there is an existing easement across Rt. 440 in favor of NJ
Transit.
•
Roadway
o Rt. 440 is classified as an Urban Principal Arterial Roadway with a posted speed limit
of 40 mph, and an AADT of 52,221 vpd (2022).
o The typical section includes two 12’ SB lanes, three 12’ wide NB lanes, a variable
width median with a concrete barrier, variable width shoulders, and sidewalks which
vary from 4’ to 6’ in width.
•
Crash Analysis
o Crash records were collected from 1/1/19 – 9/22/22 and indicate 133 crashes within
the project area. 59% were same direction rear end, 17% were same direction side
swipe, and only 1 crash involved a pedestrian.
o The major contributing circumstances for these crashes were driver inattention and
driver following too closely.
•
Traffic Analysis - Mr. Kleen from M&S presented the traffic analysis performed on the
project.
o Traffic data was collected in October 2022 in the project area.
o During both the AM and PM weekday peaks, traffic on Rt. 440 is about the same in
the NB and SB directions.
o There is no significant change to peak traffic volume on Rt. 440 on the weekends,
although the peak hours move to mid-day as opposed to morning/evening
commutes.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o The intersections with Rt. 440 (E 32nd St., Lefante Way, and Goldsborough Dr.) see
significantly more traffic in the PM and weekends than during the weekday AM
period. Increases range from 35% to 95%.
o The vast majority of pedestrian and bicycle crossings in the existing conditions are at
the E 32nd St./Lefante Way intersection. However, with rapid growth ongoing on the
PABH, the numbers at Goldsborough Dr. are expected to increase.
o Ms. Mack noted that when Goldsborough Drive was constructed as a part of the
major access permit from the NJDOT, no sidewalk was provided for on the west side
of Rt. 440.
•
Environmental Screening - Ms. Napolitono from M&S presented the environmental
screening.
o Six identified individual historic properties are located in the study area.
o No impacts are anticipated to the wetlands associated with the Hudson River
Estuary, the wetlands associated with the drainage ditch near Costco, or the Hudson
River (SE2).
o State and Federal T&E species were documented in the area and coordination with
USFWS through Section 7 consultation will be required.
o There is the potential for hazardous waste involvement as the project limits are
located with deed notice area, groundwater contamination area, and historic fill.
o The anticipated permits/approvals are limited to the Hudson Essex Passaic Soil
Conservation District.
o Mr. Raichle noted that Bayonne has a master waterfront permit approved by the
NJDEP. Additionally, they have groundwater CEAs and remediation plans/approvals
for PABH.
•
Mr. Camerlengo presented the existing deficiencies and issues on the project.
o No safe pedestrian crossing of Rt. 440 connecting 34th St. HBLR Station and
Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (Pedestrians cross Rt. 440 at Goldsborough Dr. or by
hopping over median barrier)
o Substandard guide rail along Rt. 440 SB.
o Roadway cross slopes do not meet design standards.
•
Existing Utilities
o Underground Utilities: Include Bayonne Sewer facilities under Rt. 440, IMTT,
Williams, and HESS gas/oil/petroleum pipelines.
o Aerial Utilities: PSE&G Electric, Verizon, and Cablevision/Altice USA aerial utilities
along Rt. 440 NB.
d. Alternatives Analysis
•
Design Constraints: There are a few design constraints in the project area which were
taken into account during the alternatives analysis phase.
o Connecting to the existing NJ Transit pier.
o Maintaining stopping sight distance to the signalized intersection at Goldsborough
Dr.
o Limited ROW for the east landing.
o Existing overhead and underground utilities along Rt. 440 NB.
o Potential for construction in the median.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
Development of Alternatives: Four alternatives were analyzed for this project:
o Alternative 1 – Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
-
Crosswalk proposed at the south end of the Rt. 440 and Goldsborough Dr.
intersection.
-
Sidewalk added along Rt. 440 SB to connect pedestrians to existing sidewalk
near Prospect Ave.
-
Pedestrian signals added and traffic signal timings would require modifications.
-
Curbing would be added and the existing guide rail would be replaced to meet
current standards.
-
Alternative 1 Pros:
Least expensive alternative
Shortest construction duration (one construction season)
Limited impact to Rt. 440 traffic during construction
Temporary closure of Rt. 440 SB shoulder
Relocation of overhead utilities not required
Limited excavation and disposal of historic fill
-
Alternative 1 Cons:
Creates conflict between vehicles and pedestrians
Addition of Rt. 440 crosswalk degrades signal operations to LOS F (worst
case)
Major Development per SWM regulations
Requires roadway improvements, upgrades to the existing traffic signal and
removal of existing cantilever sign structure.
-
Ms. Blick asked about the removal of the existing swale and how it contributed
to making the project a major development. Mr. Sullivan noted that the major
development would be caused by the addition of concrete curb collecting new
regulated motor vehicle surface.
-
Responding to a question about proposed mitigation, Mr. Sullivan noted that it
has not been studied in detail yet, but that quantity would not be a concern, it
would be quality of the runoff and that it would most likely be handled with an
MPD.
-
Ms. Blick noted that the project would not be grandfathered with the new rules
next month but may be grandfathered with the new regulation proposed for
January 2024.
o Alternative 2 – Single-Span Steel Truss Pedestrian Bridge
-
Single span truss bridge with roof and chain link fencing. Span length of
approximately 138’, interior horizontal opening of 11’-0”, minimum vertical
clearance of 22’-10”.
-
The proposed bridge would attach to the existing NJ Transit pier at the west end
and an ADA compliant stair and elevator system to access the bridge from
ground level will be provided at the east landing.
-
Alternative 2 Pros
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing.
Moderate construction duration (one construction season).
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
No impact to intersection LOS.
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction.
Covered bridge eliminates snow removal maintenance.
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components.
Minor drainage improvements required.
-
Alternative 2 Cons
Most expensive “build” alternative.
Relocation of overhead utilities along Route 440 NB required.
One overnight closure of Route 440 required for erection of truss.
o Alternative 3 – Two-Span Sleek Concrete Pedestrian Bridge
-
Two span concrete bridge with concrete pier in Rt. 440 median. Uncovered
structure with fencing provided over roadway, span length of approximately
140’, interior horizontal opening of 11’-0”, minimum vertical clearance of 22’-8”.
-
The proposed bridge would attach to the existing NJ Transit pier at the west end
and an ADA compliant stair and elevator system to access the bridge from
ground level will be provided at the east landing.
-
Alternative 3 Pros
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing.
No impact to intersection LOS.
Minor drainage improvements required.
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components.
-
Alternative 3 Cons
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required.
Longest construction duration (two construction seasons).
Two overnight closures of Rt. 440 required for falsework construction.
Multiple Rt. 440 lane shifts during construction required for pier/median,
east landing, and bridge construction.
Snow removal maintenance required.
o Alternative 4 – Single-Span Simple Through Girder
-
Single span steel through girder bridge with steel floor beams and reinforced
concrete deck and curved top chain link fencing mounted to top flange. Span
length of approximately 132’, interior horizontal opening of 11’-0”, minimum
vertical clearance of 22’-10”.
-
The proposed bridge would attach to the existing NJ Transit pier at the west end
and an ADA compliant stair and elevator system to access the bridge from
ground level will be provided at the east landing.
-
Alternative 4 Pros
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing.
Least expensive “build” alternative.
Moderate construction duration (one construction season).
No impact to intersection LOS.
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction.
Minor drainage improvements required.
-
Alternative 4 Cons
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required.
One overnight closure of Rt. 440 required for erection of girders.
Lacks architectural/aesthetic components.
e. Utility Relocation Alternatives: Mr. Camerlengo presented the options investigated for the
relocation of the overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB. Meetings with PSE&G and discussions
with Verizon have occurred to discuss the feasibility and impacts of each option. The three
options are summarized below:
•
Vertical Relocation – Not feasible for PSE&G as planned addition of power lines will
require an excessive pole height.
•
Horizontal Relocation – Not feasible for PSE&G due to access requirements, clearance to
proposed structure, and guying requirements. Potentially feasible for Verizon and Altice
USA/Cablevision.
•
Underground Relocation – Feasible for all utilities but could be costly.
f. Preliminary Construction Staging: The preliminary construction staging scheme for each of the
alternatives was presented. Mr. Camerlengo noted that the general construction scheme
presented is preliminary and could be refined through coordination with NJDOT SME’s at the
Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop (CRAW):
•
Alternative 1 - Constructed in three main stages:
o Stage 1: Demolish existing guide rail and remove existing overhead sign.
o Stage 2: Construct sidewalk, curbing, drainage, guide rail, and drainage ditch on west
side.
o Stage 3: Install striping of crosswalk and median; install new pedestrian signals and
push buttons; adjust traffic signal timing.
•
Alternative 2 - Constructed in three main stages:
o Stage 1: Relocate existing aerial utilities underground towards east edge of existing
ROW – temporary lane shift to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 2: Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system - temporary lane shift of Rt.
440 NB to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 3: Bridge Erection. Temporary full closure of Rt. 440 required for crane
positioning and bridge erection (one night).
•
Alternative 3 - Constructed in four main stages:
o Stage 1: Relocate existing aerial utilities underground towards east edge of existing
ROW – temporary lane shift to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 2: Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system – temporary lane shift to the
west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 3: Demolish existing median barrier, construct proposed pier footing, column,
and cap, then construct final median barrier – temporary lane shift to the east,
maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 4: Bridge construction. Overnight closures required for falsework construction
and removal.
•
Alternative 4 - Constructed in three main stages:
o Stage 1: Relocate existing aerial utilities underground towards east edge of existing
ROW - temporary lane shift of Rt. 440 NB to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Stage 2: Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system - temporary lane shift of Rt.
440 NB to the west, maintaining all lanes of traffic.
o Stage 3: Bridge erection. Temporary full closure of Rt. 440 required for crane
positioning and bridge erection (one night).
g. Community Outreach: The Community Outreach on the project to date has included two
stakeholder meetings (December 2022 and April 2023) and the creation of a project website
(http://34thstbayonnepedestrianbridge.com). A presentation to the City Council as well as a
Public Information Center (PIC) are anticipated to occur in June or July 2023.
h. Mr. Camerlengo wrapped up the presentation by presenting the action items and next steps
for the project which he noted include a CRAW, finalization of the alternatives analysis, City
Council presentation, PIC, and submission of the draft Concept Development Report.
i.
Mr. Camerlengo then opened the meeting to an open discussion period.
Open Discussion
•
Ms. Bremer-Nei recommended adding grooves in the proposed stairs (runnel) so that bicyclists can
easily transport their bicycles down the staircase.
o TYLin agreed that these should be added to the proposed stairs as a design detail in
subsequent phases of the project.
•
Mr. Abitz inquired if there were plans to widen Rt. 440 in the future and noted that the proposed
bridge length may need to accommodate proposed widening. Ms. Bremer-Nei added that this also
may include the addition of a shared use path.
o TYLin responded that there is approximately 21 feet between the existing curbline and the
west edge of the proposed structure, which should allow for some room for modifications to
Rt. 440 if they were to occur.
•
Mr. Lathia requested that an alternative be added which studies an Inverset structural system as a
bridge alternative.
o Mr. Lester indicated that the Inverset prefabricated unit would create challenges connecting
to the existing NJ Transit pier due to the difference in elevation of the walking surface.
•
Mr. Szulczewski asked the project team to explore the possibility of using a prestressed box beams
superstructure and the possibility of a multi-girder bridge in lieu of through girders which are
fracture critical.
•
Mr. Szulczewski commented regarding the proposed structure having a stair and elevator system as
opposed to a ramp system due to the maintenance required with an elevator. He added that if the
NJDOT were to take ownership of the proposed structure, providing a ramp system would be
preferred by the NJDOT.
•
Mr. Abitz inquired if there were any concerns of flooding in the area. He added that some areas of
Rt. 440 are being raised to address flooding concerns and if the bridge were to be lowered to meet
the minimum vertical clearance and the roadway were to be raised in the future, there may be a
potential of violating the minimum vertical clearance.
o Lt. Conte responded that the project area is not prone to flooding.
•
Ms. Mack noted the NJDOT’s concerns with elevator maintenance and mentioned that discussions
are ongoing with the PANYNJ regarding mode split coordination.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
Ms. Sharp and Mr. Chan asked what the proposed foundation type for the structure would be.
o TYLin is in the process of determining the recommended foundation type based on the
available geotechnical information and subsurface constraints.
•
Mr. Szulczewski suggested that if a fracture critical member structure is selected as the PPA, this risk
should be added to the project risk register. Mr. Lathia added that if the NJDOT were to take
ownership of the proposed structure the selection of a fracture critical member structure type
would have to be approved by their director.
•
Numerous comments were submitted in the group chat, some of which were not responded to
directly in the meeting, but responses for which are provided in these minutes.
o Ms. Bremer-Nei asked if the pedestrian bridge would be wide enough for shared use with
bicyclists and people with luggage.
-
TYLin is currently showing the interior width as 11’-0” which is slightly wider that the
interior width of the existing structure (10’-8”). TYLin will investigate widening the
interior width of some of the alternatives with fencing.
o Ms. Bremer-Nei asked if there will be ramps for cyclists.
-
Ramps were originally investigated but it was determined that there is not enough
existing ROW owned by the City of Bayonne on the east side of Rt. 440 to provide an
ADA compliant ramp system. For that reason, it was determined to proceed with a stair
and elevator option.
o Ms. Kazmi asked what the size of the elevator would be. Ms. Bremer-Nei added that the
proposed elevators need to be big enough to accommodate bicycles.
-
The size of the elevator has not been determined but will be a detail which is
determined in the Preliminary Engineering phase of the project. Text will be added to
the CD Report that during the PE phase, the size of the elevator shall be large enough to
accommodate bicycles.
o Mr. Lathia noted that Section 3.4, 23.2, and 35 of the NJDOT Bridge Design Manual as well as
the current AASHTO LRFD Guide Specifications for Design of Pedestrian Bridge shall be
considered and used for this project.
-
TYLin is familiar with and has been performing the Concept Development work in
accordance with the NJDOT Design Manual for Bridges & Structures, Sixth Edition, 2016
as well as the AASHTO LFRD Guide Specifications for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges.
o Mr. Abitz noted that TYLin could discuss jurisdiction issues with Mark Hauske (NJDOT) and
provided his contact information.
o Ms. Kazmi asked if lights will be provided on the proposed bridge.
-
Currently, TYLin is only accounting for general lighting in the area along the bridge,
inside the stairway and elevator, and along the sidewalk. If desired, architectural lighting
of the bridge would be a detail determined during the next phase of the project.
o Ms. Bremer-Nei said the team may want to perform a latent demand analysis for cyclists and
pedestrians and noted that the team will want to make the bridge as convenient as possible
for pedestrians, so they want to use the bridge to cross Rt. 440.
-
Performance of a latent demand analysis will be discussed with the City of Bayonne.
TYLin and the City of Bayonne have discussed how to encourage use of the proposed
structure in multiple meetings. One way currently being implemented is proposing a
direct connection to the existing NJ Transit pedestrian facility. Others include offering a
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
bridge and stairs/elevator system that feels safe, and measures which would deter
crossing Rt. 440 illegally at grade.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Purpose: Scope Team/Core Group Meeting
Location: Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Date & Time: Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 10:00am
Email Address
robert.abitz@dot.nj.gov
Abeer.Al-Shammari@dot.nj.gov
Nabil.Ayoub@dot.nj.gov
Sandra.Blick@dot.nj.gov
Elise.Bremer-Nei@dot.nj.gov
michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
ChiWa.Chan@dot.nj.gov
Telephone
David.Rey@dot.nj.gov
pscott@mnwe.com
Taimur.Shamali@dot.nj.gov
Kimberly.Sharp@dot.nj.gov
araichle@mnwe.com
Ereny.Ibrahim@dot.nj.gov
Shahina.Kazmi@dot.nj.gov
jkleen@malickandscherer.com
Pranav.Lathia@dot.nj.gov
jim.lester@tylin.com
bayonneplanner@gmail.com
amajor@baynj.org
David.Merrick@dot.nj.gov
Paul.Miranda@dot.nj.gov
anapolitano@malickandscherer.com
Special Projects Engineer
H&H
Director of Urban Engineering
and Development
Structures and Geotech
Deputy Project Manager
Project Manager
Confidential Aid to Mayor
Right of Way North
Local Aid
Environmental
Project Manager
Geotech Unit
BSBPP
BSBPP-CSI
Traffic Engineer
Structural Engineering
NJDOT
Design Standards/Geometric
Solutions Unit
Geometric Solutions
Local Aid
H&H
Bicycle and Pedestrain
Coordinator
NJDOT
Malick & Scherer
Matrix New World
NJDOT
Matrix New World
NJDOT
Malick & Scherer
NJDOT
TYLin
City of Bayonne
City of Bayonne
NJDOT
Major, Alphonse
Merrick, David
Miranda, Paul
Napolitano, Anne
Raichle, Andrew
Rey, David
NJDOT
NJDOT
NJDOT
NJDOT
NJDOT
TYLin
NJDOT
NJDOT
NJDOT
Discipline
Affiliation
Name
Abitz, Robert
Sullivan, Greg
Malick & Scherer
gsullivan@malickandscherer.com
Ibrahim, Ereny
Kazmi, Shahina
Kleen, James
Lathia, Pranav
Lester, Jim
Mack, Suzanne
Al-Shammari, Abeer
Ayoub, Nabil
Blick, Sandra
Bremer-Nei, Elise
Camerlengo, Michael
Chan, Chi Wa
Scott, Phil
Shamali, Taimur
Sharp, Kimberly
Szulczewski, Joshua
NJDOT
Structure Value Solutions
Joshua.Szulczewski@dot.nj.gov
Zhuo, Fan
NJDOT
Zhuo.Fan@dot.nj.gov
Scope Team/Core Group Meeting with NJDOT
Pedestrian Bridge over Route
440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne | Bayonne, NJ
May 4, 2023
Agenda
• Introductions
• Project Background
• Project Location
• Purpose & Need and Project Goals
• Existing Conditions
• Alternatives Analysis
• Utility Relocation
• Construction Staging
• Community Involvement
• Action Items and Next Steps
• Open Discussion
Project Location
Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Purpose
- The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting
pedestrians and bicyclists from the east side of Route 440 just south of
Goldsborough Drive to the west side of Route 440 at the 34th Street HBLR
station
Project Need
- Pedestrian and Bicycle
- No safe pedestrian crossing in the project vicinity. Closest is at grade ~0.25 miles south
- Increased need for residents west of Route 440 to access destinations around PABH
- Increased need for residents of PABH to access 34th Street HBLR station
Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Goals
- Safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Route 440 in vicinity of
Goldsborough Drive
- Keep the public and stakeholders informed about the project through all
phases
- Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian crossing
- Minimize impacts to Route 440, stakeholders, and utilities
- Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical underclearance and sight distance to
traffic signal
- Minimize impacts to traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Dr. during
construction
Existing Conditions:
Pedestrian & Bicycle Crossings
- No pedestrian crossing of Rt. 440
provided at Goldsborough Dr.
- Pedestrian Crossing provided at E 32nd
St./Lefante Way ~0.2 miles south of
proposed bridge
- Sidewalks provided on Goldsborough
Dr. and Rt. 440 south of Prospect
Ave./Port Imperial Blvd.
- Asphalt walkway provided along Rt. 440 NB
between Goldsborough Dr. and Port
Imperial Blvd.
Existing Conditions: Structures
- Existing pier supporting NJ Transit
pedestrian walkway provided for
future structure across Rt. 440
Existing Conditions: Roadway
- Rt. 440 is classified as an Urban Principal Arterial Roadway
- Posted Speed Limit = 40 mph
- Typical Section
- Two 12’ wide SB lanes
- Three 12’ wide NB lanes
- Variable width median w/ concrete barrier
- Variable width shoulders
- Sidewalk widths vary 4’-6’
- AADT = 52,221 vpd
Existing Conditions: Crash Analysis
- Crash data collected from 1/1/19 – 9/22/22
- 133 crashes within project area
- Major Crash Types
- 78 Same Direction (rear end) (59%)
- 22 Same Direction (side swipe) (17%)
- 15 Right Angle (11%)
- 1 Pedestrian (1%)
- Major Contributing Circumstances
- 60 Driver Inattention (21%)
- 28 Following Too Closely (10%)
Existing Conditions: Traffic Analysis
Route 440 and
E. 32nd
Street/Lefante
Way
Route 440 and
Goldsborough
Drive
Environmental
Screening
‒
Six identified individual historic properties located in study area
‒
Coordination with SHPO through Section 106 consultation
‒
Open Space/Section 4(f) Parkland Resources
‒
Hudson River Walkway
‒
Wetlands associated with Hudson River Estuary and drainage
ditch near Costco.
‒
No impacts anticipated .
‒
Hudson River (SE2): FEMA FIRM El. 9’ and 50’ RZ
‒
No impacts anticipated.
‒
State & Federal T&E species documented in study area
‒
Bobolink (Breeding Sighting, Threatened), Savanah sparrow
(Breeding Sighting, Threatened), Black-crowned night heron
(foraging, threatened) and cattle egret (foraging, threatened)
‒
Tricolored bat (proposed endangered), monarch butterfly
(candidate)
‒
Coordination with USFWS through Section 7 consultation
‒
No anticipated adverse EJ or Socioeconomic impacts
‒
Potential for Hazardous Waste Involvement
‒
Project limits are located within Deed Notice Area, Groundwater
Contamination Area and Historic Fill
‒
Anticipated Permits/Approvals
‒
Hudson Essex Passaic Soil Conservation District
Existing Conditions: Existing Deficiencies and Issues
- No safe pedestrian crossing of
Rt. 440 connecting 34th St.
HBLR Station and Peninsula at
Bayonne Harbor
- Pedestrians cross Rt. 440 at
Goldsborough Dr. or by
hopping over median barrier
- Substandard guide rail along
Rt. 440 SB
- Roadway cross slopes do not
meet design standards
Data Collection: Utilities
Alternative Analysis: Design Constraints
Alternatives Analysis
- Alt. 1 – Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
- Alt. 2 – Single-span Steel Truss
- Alt. 3 – Two-span Sleek Concrete
- Alt. 4 – Single-span Simple Through Girder
Alt. 1: Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
Alt. 1: Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
Pros
- Least expensive alternative
- Shortest construction duration
- One construction season
- Limited impact to Rt. 440 traffic
during construction
- Temporary closure of Rt. 440 SB
shoulder
- Relocation of overhead utilities
not required
- Limited excavation and disposal
of historic fill
Cons
- Creates conflict between vehicles
and ped
- Addition of Rt. 440 Crosswalk
degrades signal operations to
LOS F (worst case)
- Major Development per SWM
Regulations
- Requires roadway improvements,
upgrades to the existing traffic
signal and removal of existing
cantilever sign structure
Alt. 2: Single Span Steel Truss
Alt. 2: Single Span Steel Truss
Alt. 2: Single Span Steel Truss
Cons
- Most expensive “build” alternative
- Relocation of overhead utilities
along Rt. 440 NB required
- One overnight closure of Rt. 440
required for installation of truss
Pros
- Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated
crossing
- Moderate construction duration
- One construction season
- No impact to intersection LOS
- Simpler temporary traffic control during
construction
- Covered bridge eliminates snow removal
maintenance
- Incorporates architectural/aesthetic
components
- Minor drainage improvements required
Alt. 3: Two-span Sleek Concrete
Alt. 3: Two-span Sleek Concrete
Alt. 3: Two-span Sleek Concrete
Pros
- Provides ADA compliant, grade-
separated crossing
- No impact to intersection LOS
- Minor drainage improvements required
- Incorporates architectural/aesthetic
components
Cons
- Relocation of overhead utilities along
Rt. 440 NB required
- Longest construction duration
- Two construction seasons
- Two overnight closures of Rt. 440
required for falsework installation
- Multiple Rt. 440 lane shifts during
construction
- Required for pier/median, east landing,
and bridge construction
- Snow removal maintenance required
Alt. 4: Single Span Simple Through Girder
Alt. 4: Single Span Simple Through Girder
Alt. 4: Single Span Simple Through Girder
Pros
- Provides ADA compliant, grade-
separated crossing
- Least expensive “build” alternative
- Moderate construction duration
- One construction season
- No impact to intersection LOS
- Simpler temporary traffic control
during construction
- Minor drainage improvements
required
Cons
- Relocation of overhead utilities along
Rt. 440 NB required
- One overnight closure of Rt. 440
required for installation of girders
- Lacks architectural/aesthetic
components
- Snow removal maintenance required
Utility Relocation
Alternatives
- Vertical Relocation
- Not feasible due to planned addition of PSE&G
lines and excessive pole height required
- Horizontal Relocation
- Not feasible for PSE&G as clearance for access,
clearance to structure, and guying would be
required
- Potentially feasible for Verizon and
Altice/Cablevision lines pending guying
- Underground Relocation
- Feasible for all utilities, but could be costly
Construction Staging
Alternative 1
- Stage 1: Demolition
- Demolish existing guide rail, remove existing overhead sign
structure
- Stage 2: Sidewalk, Drainage and Guide Rail
Construction
- Construct sidewalk, curbing, drainage, guide rail, and
drainage ditch on west side
- Stage 3: Striping, Pedestrian Signals, and Traffic
Signal Timing
- Striping of crosswalk and median, installation of new
pedestrian signals and push buttons, adjustment of traffic
signal timing
Construction Staging
Alternatives 2 & 4
- Stage 1: Utility Relocation
- Relocate existing aerial utilities underground
towards east edge of existing ROW
- Stage 2: Pier/Stairs/Elevator
- Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system
- Stage 3: Bridge Erection
- Temporary full closure of Rt. 440 required for
crane positioning and bridge erection
Construction Staging
Alternative 3
- Stage 1: Utility Relocation
- Relocate existing aerial utilities underground
towards east edge of existing ROW
- Stage 2: Pier/Stairs/Elevator
- Construct east pier, stairs, and elevator system
- Stage 3: Pier and Median Barrier
- Demolish existing median barrier, construct
proposed pier footing, column, and cap, then
construct final median barrier
- Stage 4: Bridge Erection
- Overnight closure for formwork construction
Community Outreach
Public Involvement Action Plan
- Meetings
Stakeholder meeting #1 (December 2022)
Stakeholder meeting #2 (April 2023)
‒ City Council presentation (June 2023)
‒ Public Information Center (June 2023)
Project Website
- https://34thstbayonnepedestrianbridge.com
‒ Overview of the project
‒ Project delivery process
‒ Frequently asked questions
‒ Links to documents and resources
‒ Comment submission email
Action Items &
Next Steps
- May 2023
- Meeting with NJDOT Subject Matter Experts
- Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop
- Finalize Alternatives Analysis
- June 2023
- City Council Presentation
- Public Information Center
- July/August 2023
- Submit Draft CD Report
- Reviews by City and NJDOT
- September 2023
- CD Phase complete
Open Discussion
Progress Meeting #8
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #8 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #8 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, May 16, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, May 16, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and
TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Progressed Alternatives Analysis
o Held combined Scope Team/Core Group Meeting on 5/4/23.
o Held coordination meeting with PSE&G on 5/12/23.
o Coordinated with Verizon regarding utility relocation.
o Updated project website to add GP&Es, photos, and renderings.
2. Activities in progress:
o Alternatives Analysis
Continue refining GP&E’s, construction staging and detour plans, and risk register.
Continue utility coordination with PSE&G, Verizon, and Altice USA/Cablevision regarding
utility relocation alternatives.
Progress ROW/Construction Easement investigations
Progress Alternatives Analysis Report
3. Activities planned for next month:
o Complete Develop Alternatives and corresponding sub-activities.
o Schedule CD CRAW
o Attend City Council Meeting pending selection of PPA.
o Complete ROW/Construction Easement investigation
Jurisdiction coordination meeting
4. Open Discussion
o Updates on utility relocation
Mr. Lester presented a summary of what was discussed with PSE&G and Verizon
regarding the relocation of their overhead utilities.
−
PSE&G can relocate underground into a 3’x3’ utility bay located beneath the right-
most lane of Rt. 440, close to the curb line. Depending on the number of circuits
currently on the poles and the need for spares, the limits of the utility relocation
may extend to the first few poles north and south of the proposed bridge.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #8 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
−
Verizon can maintain their overhead lines and could lower them slightly to
accommodate the proposed bridge. The lines would stay on the same alignment
and the existing poles to avoid requiring new poles or new guying. This will
require moving the elevator/stairs slightly to the east to ensure the propose
bridge will span over the utility lines.
o Mr. Raichle asked about the limits of the proposed sidewalk at the east landing. Currently
sidewalk is only being shown connecting to existing sidewalk at Goldsborough Drive, but
proposed sidewalk should be extended down to meet existing sidewalk near Port Imperial
Boulevard.
TYLin will update the proposed plans and renderings to show the extension of the
proposed sidewalk.
o Before a PPA is selected, Ms. Mack noted that there are some open-ended items brought up
by the NJDOT SMEs during the Scope Team/Core Group meeting which should get resolved.
These include:
Ensuring that future widening of Rt. 440 could be accommodated.
Potentially eliminating the stairs/elevator and providing a ramp system.
Investigating a fifth alternative of an Inverset type structure.
o Mr. Lester noted that his understanding of the NJDOT’s requests for changes to alternatives
was only required if the NJDOT were to take ownership and have jurisdiction of the structure.
o A discussion was held regarding jurisdiction and right of entry required for the project.
The City of Bayonne and TYLin agreed that discussions regarding the jurisdiction of who
will ultimately own and maintain the structure are a high priority as it may impact the
selection of a PPA. These discussions will likely need to be handled at a higher level with
individuals from other agencies (NJ Transit and the NJDOT) who the project team is
currently corresponding with.
Discussion with NJ Transit regarding right of entry requirements to facilitate the
construction of the bridge can be handled between technical staff at TYLin and NJ
Transit, but these discussions should be separate from any jurisdiction discussions.
Mr. Raichle noted that a new pedestrian bridge over Rt. 1&9 in Jersey City connecting
two sides of Lincoln Park may have faced similar jurisdiction issues. This project may
offer us some precedent for how to apply it to the subject project.
o Mr. Lester presented the preliminary detour of Rt. 440 traffic during a weekend overnight
closure of the structure for structure erection or falsework construction. The detour utilizes
different local roadways in the area; notably Avenue E, Avenue C, and E 32nd Street.
Ms. Mack noted that the detour route should be coordinated with Lt. Conte before it is
finalized.
Ms. Mack expressed concern with relying heavily on utilizing E 32nd Street to return
traffic to Rt. 440 SB as this bridge is already in a state of deterioration.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #8 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
ACTION ITEMS
No.
Action Item
Responsible Party
1
TYLin will update the GP&E and renderings to incorporate recent design
changes including utility relocations, extension of sidewalk, and
lengthening of the proposed bridge.
TYLin
2
Schedule CD Constructability Risk Analysis Workshop with NJDOT.
TYLin
3
Schedule jurisdiction meeting with agencies.
City of Bayonne
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #9
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #9 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #9 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, June 20, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, June 20, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and
TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Scheduled CD CRAW for 6/29 @ 10:00am
o Issued final minutes of Scope Team/Core Group Meeting
o Completed Crash Analysis Diagram (Activity 2200)
2. Activities in progress:
o Alternatives Analysis
Continue refining GP&E’s, construction staging and detour plans, and risk register.
Utility coordination
•
Conformed working hours of PSE&G, still waiting on relocation cost estimate.
TYLin will be following-up with them again today.
Progressing ROW/Construction Easement investigations
Progress Alternatives Analysis Report
Draft Concept Development Report is in progress
3. Activities planned for next month:
o Complete Develop Alternatives and corresponding sub-activities.
o Hold CD CRAW
o Schedule Public Information Center
Dr. Ryan would want to be at the PIC and he’s out during the month of July, so the PIC
would have to be the first week of August.
4. Open Discussion
o Tentative Schedule to Completion
CD CRAW: June 29th
Submit Draft Alternatives Analysis Report: July 7th
Hold in-person Public Information Center: Week of July 31st to August 4th
•
Will be held in City Hall so that it could be televised.
•
The format will be an open presentation with display boards set up and the
project team interacting with crowd and answering questions and having a rolling
presentation set up on the side for people to view.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #9 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
•
TYLin will talk with Sam Schwartz to check their availability for beginning of
August.
•
Public Notice: TYLin will prepare the public notice of the meeting in the NJDOT’s
standard format. The City will get the list of residents within 250’ of the project to
send out hard copies to residents.
•
Mr. Lester suggested meeting with Dr. Ryan before he leaves in July to get his
input on the PIC. Ms. Mack will talk with him today and get his availability for the
rest of June as well as for the PIC.
Submit Draft CD Report to City for review: July 28th
•
This first draft would not include the Resolution of Support from the City or the
summary of the PIC.
•
Aim to receive comments from City: August 11th
•
Finish addressing City’s comments: August 18th
Present alternatives and PPA to City Council at Caucus meeting: August 9th
•
Ms. Mack will check with the Council president to see if they are okay with us
presenting at the Caucus. TYLin will prepare a brief presentation 4-5 slides (scope
of project, a slide for each option, cost summary). Ms. Mack and Mr. Raichle will
present with TYLin present.
Attend City Council meeting and receive Resolution of Support: August 16th
Submit Draft CD Report to NJDOT for review: August 18th
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
CD Constructability Risk Analysis
Workshop
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop Minutes
Date:
Thursday, June 29, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
Meeting Attendance, Presentation
Attendees:
See attached
MEETING MINUTES
On Thursday, June 29, 2023, a Concept Development Constructability-Risk Analysis Workshop was held
between the City of Bayonne, the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), and TYLin to discuss
the constructability of the project as well as the associated project risks. Below is a summary of the key
discussion outcomes.
Mr. Camerlengo welcomed all attendees, introduced the TYLin team, and began the presentation. The
PowerPoint presentation is attached to these minutes for reference.
After the presentation was made, the meeting transitioned to an open discussion period. A summary of
the questions and comments posed as well as associated answers is below.
Open Discussion
•
Dr. Ryan asked TYLin if there has been any response from the cable company.
o Mr. Lester responded that both Verizon and Cablevision/Altice USA had responded to Utility
Contact Letter No. 1 sent in September 2022 confirming that they have utilities in the project
area. Chris Ogrodnik from Verizon has been responsive to phone and email discussions
regarding the project and potential utility relocations.
•
Mr. Szulczewski asked if the comments which the NJDOT had previously made at the Scope
Team/Core Group meeting on the fracture critical structure have been addressed.
o Mr. Lester noted that Alternative 4 is being revised to remove the fracture critical nature of the
original structure type as well as to include other superstructure types. Alternative 4 will now
be a redundant structure with multiple girders such as steel girders, multiple precast concrete
box girders, or a prefabricated bridge units such as an Inverset beams or NEXT beams.
•
Mr. Kondash asked if TYLin investigated removing the existing median barrier to maximize the space
available for the Rt. 440 northbound lanes to be shifted, thus maximizing the work zone on the east
side of the project.
o TYLin noted that they would add this to the risk register as an opportunity for reducing the
construction duration.
•
Mr. Szulczewski asked if Alternative 2 – Single-span Steel Truss is the Preliminary Preferred Alternative
(PPA) and if the comments which the NJDOT Structures Department had made on Alternative 2 had
been addressed.
o At this point, Alternative 2 is the staff recommended PPA, but this will not be finalized until after
the City Council meeting and the Public Information Center.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o There are structural details which can be studied and implemented in future design phases so
that Alternative 2 is not a fracture critical member. Text regarding the risk of Alternative 2 being
considered a fracture critical member will be included in the CD Report.
o TYLin will add a risk to the risk register regarding the ownership and maintenance of the elevator
depending on which entity ultimately takes jurisdiction of the proposed structure.
•
Mr. Pavlovich asked if there are any anticipated impacts to NJ Transit or Conrail properties.
o With the proposed bridge connecting to the existing NJ Transit structure, there will be impacts
on NJ Transit’s property. NJ Transit is aware of the project and the proposed connection and
TYLin is actively coordinating with them regarding the ROW/access/easements required to
perform work on their property. Conrail properties include where the light rail and freight tracks
are located and are not anticipated to be impacted by this project.
•
Mr. Al-Shammar asked about a comment made during the Scope Team/Core Group meeting regarding
allowing for the future widening of Rt. 440.
o Mr. Lester noted that the proposed east landing containing the stairs and elevator is
approximately 35 feet from the existing curb line, which will allow for some widening of Rt. 440
in the future if it is undertaken by the NJDOT.
•
Mr. Al-Shammer asked for confirmation that this is a full-scope project, and that re-surfacing will be
performed to eliminate controlling substandard design elements (cross slopes).
o Mr. Camerlengo confirmed that this is a full-scope project and that the cross slopes will be
addressed as part of the project.
o Subsequent to this meeting, TYLin confirmed that, based on available information, there are
no Controlling Substandard Design Elements warranting a Design Exception along Route 440
within the project corridor. However, this shall be confirmed during Preliminary Engineering
(PE). If it is determined during PE that cross slope improvements are required, milling and
paving can be considered to remedy this. This will need to be coordinated with the city ad
NJDOT during PE.
•
In response to the preliminary detour routes presented, Mr. Pavlovich noted that pedestrian safety
at the E Center St./Avenue E/45th St. intersection should be investigated.
o Mr. Camerlengo noted that this detour route would be in place during the overnight hours and
that there may not be significant pedestrian traffic in this area while the detour is in place.
Further study of the potential for pedestrian activity at this intersection during detour hours in
conjunction with the operating times of the light rail may be performed in the Preliminary
Engineering phase.
•
Mr. Neu provided multiple comments in the meeting chat window; answers to which were discussed
and are summarized below.
o Existing retention basin on east side: This is the remnants of a former roadway on the MOTBY
property with existing inlets and drainage pipes underneath the road. Mr. Lester indicated a
concept level study of the drainage was performed and drainage improvements at the east
landing area will be required as part of this project.
o DCA review and approval issues and timing for elevator: Mr. Lester indicated that TYLin will add
a risk to the risk register noting that review and approval of the elevator system may be time
consuming.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
CD Constructability and Risk Analysis Workshop Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Utility relocations may control construction schedule: Mr. Camerlengo indicated that TYLin
concurred and noted that this may be an opportunity for advanced utility relocations.
o Proposed bridge obstructing traffic signal: Mr. Camerlengo indicated that the TYLin team
investigated this based on the surveyed height of the existing traffic signal and the proposed
bottom chord elevation of the bridge and determined that stopping sight distance to the
signalized intersection will not be a concern.
o NJ Transit pedestrian access during construction: TYLin and the City of Bayonne agreed that
pedestrian access within the existing NJ Transit structure would need to be investigated further
especially while work is being performed on the existing structure. Mr. Raichle noted that a
pedestrian detour may need to be established.
o Existing cantilever sign structure: Mr. Lester indicated that TYLin will add a risk to the risk
register that if this sign is planned on being used in the future, it may be obstructed by the
proposed bridge.
•
In response to a question posed by Mr. Patel asking where the overhead utilities are being relocated
to, Mr. Lester responded that the PSE&G electric utilities will be relocated underground beneath the
right most lane of Rt. 440 and that the aerial telephone and cable utilities will be lowered on the
existing utility poles.
•
Responding to a utility ownership question asked by Mr. Neu, Mr. Lester clarified that the existing
pipelines running along Rt. 440 northbound are owned by IMTT (including former HESS line) and
Williams Transco.
•
In response to a coordination question posed by Mr. Pavlovich, Mr. Camerlengo noted that the
preliminary detour routes which were presented have been coordinated with Lt. Conte from the
Bayonne Police Department for his concurrence prior to this meeting.
•
Mr. Kondash asked if there is a plan to use New Jersey State Police officers for traffic control.
o Mr. Raichle noted that for the Interchange 14A and Bayonne Bridge projects, Bayonne Police
Department officers were used for traffic control.
o Mr. Kondash added that an agreement will be needed with the Bayonne Police Department if
they are planned to be used in place of New Jersey State Police officers.
o TYLin will add the coordination of this agreement to the project risk register.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at jim.lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester, PE
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Project: Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Purpose: CD Constructability Risk Analysis Workshop
Location: Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Date & Time: Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 10:00am
smerlienerodriguez@dot.nj.gov
Landscape Architecture
NJDOT
Rodriguez, Smerliene
hung.tang@dot.nj.gov
Geometric Solutions
NJDOT
Tang, Hung
Ashwint.patel@dot.nj.gov
Utility Management
NJDOT
Patel, Ashwin
chandrakant.pate@dot.nj.gov
BCM
NJDOT
Patel, Chandrakant
babatunde.olasunmade@dot.nj.gov
Work Zone Safety
NJDOT
Olasunmade, Babatunde
thomas.kondash@dot.nj.gov
BCM
NJDOT
Kondash, Thomas
alexander.borovskis@dot.nj.gov
Construction
NJDOT
Borovskis, Alexander
jpavlovich@hotmail.com
Special Projects Engineer
City of Bayonne
Pavlovich, John
Muzamil.Husain@tylin.com
Structures
TYLin
Husain, Muzamil
weric.neu@dot.nj.gov
Construction
NJDOT
Neu, (William) Eric
Szulczewski, Joshua
NJDOT
Structure Value Solutions
Joshua.Szulczewski@dot.nj.gov
Zhuo, Fan
NJDOT
Structural Engineering
Zhuo.Fan@dot.nj.gov
Dennis.wright@dot.nj.gov
BCM
NJDOT
Wright, Dennis
Discipline
Affiliation
Name
Lathia, Pranav
Lester, Jim
Mack, Suzanne
Al-Shammari, Abeer
Camerlengo, Michael
Chan, Chi Wa
Scott, Phil
Major, Alphonse
Merrick, David
Miranda, Paul
Raichle, Andrew
NJDOT
TYLin
NJDOT
Project Manager
Geotech Unit
Structural Engineering
Geometric Solutions
NJDOT
Matrix New World
Matrix New World
NJDOT
TYLin
City of Bayonne
City of Bayonne
NJDOT
Special Projects Engineer
Director of Urban Engineering
and Development
Deputy Project Manager
Project Manager
Confidential Aid to Mayor
Right of Way North
Local Aid
Pranav.Lathia@dot.nj.gov
jim.lester@tylin.com
bayonneplanner@gmail.com
amajor@baynj.org
David.Merrick@dot.nj.gov
Paul.Miranda@dot.nj.gov
Email Address
Abeer.Al-Shammari@dot.nj.gov
michael.camerlengo@tylin.com
ChiWa.Chan@dot.nj.gov
pscott@mnwe.com
araichle@mnwe.com
Concept Development: Constructability Risk Analysis Workshop
Pedestrian Bridge over Route
440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne | Bayonne, NJ
June 29, 2023
2
2
Agenda
• Project Overview
• Location
• Purpose & Need and Project Goals
• Construction Sequence & MPT
• Alternative 1
• Alternative 3
• Alternative 4
• Alternative 2
• Detour Routes
• Constructability Concerns
• Anticipated Construction Durations
• Risk Register Review
• Open Discussion
3
3
Project Overview: Project Location
4
4
Project Overview: Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Purpose
• The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting
pedestrians and bicyclists from the east side of Route 440 just south of
Goldsborough Drive to the west side of Route 440 at the 34th Street HBLR
station
Project Need
• Pedestrian and Bicycle
•
No safe pedestrian crossing in the project vicinity. Closest is at grade ~0.25 miles south
•
Increased need for residents west of Route 440 to access destinations around PABH
•
Increased need for residents of PABH to access 34th Street HBLR station
5
5
Project Overview: Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Goals
• Safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Route 440 in vicinity of
Goldsborough Drive
• Keep the public and stakeholders informed about the project through all
phases
• Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian crossing
• Minimize impacts to Route 440, stakeholders, and utilities
• Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical underclearance and sight distance to
traffic signal
• Minimize impacts to traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Dr. during
construction
6
6
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 1: Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
7
7
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 1: Construction Sequence
8
8
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 3: Two-span Sleek Concrete Bridge
9
9
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 3: Construction Sequence
10
10
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 3: Construction Sequence
11
11
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 4: Single Span Simple Girder Structure
12
12
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 4: Construction Sequence
13
13
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 2: Single Span Steel Truss Bridge (Staff Recommended PPA)
14
14
Construction Sequence & MPT:
Alternative 2: Construction Sequence
15
15
Construction Sequence & MPT: Detour Routes
16
16
Construction Sequence & MPT: Detour Routes
17
17
Construction Sequence & MPT: Detour Routes
18
18
Constructability Concerns
• Material delivery access to project site
• Potential delivery routes can be analyzed in the PE phase.
• Delivery access likely via NJ Turnpike exit 14A or Rt. 440.
• Clearance at toll plaza could restrict oversized loads.
• Preliminary investigation into vertical clearance at E Centre St. bridge and E 40th St. bridge appears
adequate. Chosin Few Way is another potential route with no overhead restrictions.
• Potential contractor staging area
• One potential staging area is a portion of the 34th St. HBLR parking lot.
• Another potential staging area is unused land near Bayonne Fire Department on Chosin Few Way.
19
19
Constructability Concerns
Potential Contractor Staging Areas
20
20
Constructability Concerns
• Material delivery access to project site
• Potential delivery routes can be analyzed in the PE phase.
• Delivery access likely via NJ Turnpike exit 14A or Rt. 440.
• Clearance at toll plaza could restrict oversized loads.
• Preliminary investigation into vertical clearance at E Centre St. bridge and E 40th St. bridge appears
adequate. Chosin Few Way is another potential route with no overhead restrictions.
• Potential contractor staging area
• One potential staging area is a portion of the 34th St. HBLR parking lot.
• Another potential staging area is unused land near Bayonne Fire Department on Chosin Few Way.
• Potential crane placement locations
• Anticipate using a two-crane pick: 150T crane with a maximum pick radius of 110’ and a maximum
estimated pick weight of 43,000 pounds.
• Alternate: using a single 350T crane with a maximum pick radius of 110’ and a maximum
estimated pick weight of 85,000 pounds.
21
21
Constructability Concerns
Potential Crane Placement Locations
22
22
Constructability Concerns
• Material delivery access to project site
• Potential delivery routes can be analyzed in the PE phase.
• Delivery access likely via NJ Turnpike exit 14A or Rt. 440.
• Clearance at toll plaza could restrict oversized loads.
• Preliminary investigation into vertical clearance at E Centre St. bridge and E 40th St. bridge appears
adequate. Chosin Few Way is another potential route with no overhead restrictions.
• Potential contractor staging area
• One potential staging area is a portion of the 34th St. HBLR parking lot.
• Another potential staging area is unused land near Bayonne Fire Department on Chosin Few Way.
• Potential crane placement locations
• Anticipate using a two-crane pick: 150T crane with a maximum pick radius of 110’ and a maximum
estimated pick weight of 43,000 pounds.
• Alternate: using a single 350T crane with a maximum pick radius of 110’ and a maximum estimated pick
weight of 85,000 pounds.
• Splicing of truss could be utilized to reduce pick weight
23
23
Anticipated Construction Durations
Total
Alternative
~6-8 months
Alternative 1 – At-Grade Crossing
~10-12 months
Alternative 2 – Single Span Steel Truss
~15-16 months
Alternative 3 – Two Span Sleek Concrete
~10-12 months
Alternative 4 – Single Span Simple Structure
• Anticipated stage durations based on concept level constructability analysis.
• Majority of project assumes one crew per trade working 8-hour days, 5-days
per week.
• Nighttime work for erection of bridge or falsework will be required.
• Winter shutdown from 12/1 through 3/15 will be required for some
alternatives.
24
24
PE Risk Score
Risk
Risk Response Action Plan
Risk 1: As a result of requiring an overnight
temporary closure of Rt. 440 during bridge or
falsework erection, alternatives 2, 3, and 4
may not have a suitable detour for Rt. 440 SB
traffic, leading to traffic delays and impacts to
local streets.
- Work to reduce the length and timing of any temporary closure of Rt.
440 in order to minimize negative effects.
- Develop a draft detour plan during CD and coordinate closely with the
City of Bayonne and the NJDOT to improve/refine it.
- Present detour plan to public at PIC to solicit their input.
20
70
Risk 2: As a result of the proposed pedestrian
bridge crossing through the existing
overhead electrical, cable, and telephone
utilities, relocation of the utilities may be
required, leading to significant increases to
the cost and schedule of the project.
- Coordinate with OH utility companies in CD to develop feasible
alternatives.
- Develop structural alternatives that allow for the inclusion of
underground utility relocation.
- Acquire underground utility relocation cost estimate and timelines in
CD to better understand the risk.
- Clearly identify risk in CD Report and account for continued, detailed
coordination in PE Scope Statement.
Risk 3: As a result of utilizing the existing pier
on the west landing, modifications or
strengthening improvements may need to be
made in order to support the proposed
structure, leading to an increase in the scope
of work in subsequent phases of the project.
- In CD Report, clearly identify the risk and the requirement for further
study in subsequent phases of the project. Include available as-built
plans related to the structure.
- In PE, perform a structural analysis of the existing pier to determine the
maximum load it could support from a proposed pedestrian bridge.
Include a recommendation as to it's potential of being used in the
Structural Design Recommendation Summary.
16
Risk Register Review
25
25
PE Risk Score
Risk
Risk Response Action Plan
Risk 4: As a result of limited ROW and the
proposed construction areas, contractor
access to the different areas of the project
may be limited, leading to potential
construction easements, potential for lane
shifts, increased construction costs, and/or
increased construction duration.
- During CD, develop a constructability plan to determine
potential contractor access points and potential construction
easements.
- Hold a CRAW in the CD phase to get input from NJDOT
Construction SMEs.
24
40
Risk 5: As a result of limited ROW width at
the east landing, existing underground
utilities, and the plan for the proposed pier
footing, stairs, elevator, and potential
underground utilities, the east landing area
could become very congested, leading to
detailed coordination and design earlier in
the project process than is usual.
- In CD Phase, gather as much information as possible as to the
location of existing underground utilities.
- In CD Phase, coordinate with utilities companies to determine
the potential footprint of underground utility relocation of
existing aerial utilities.
- Provide structural alternatives which have a minimum footprint
on the east side in order to allow for clearance from existing
underground utilities and the addition of proposed underground
utilities.
Risk Register Review
26
26
Open Discussion
Progress Meeting #10
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #10 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #10 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, July 18, 2023
Location:
Mayors Conference Room, Bayonne Municipal Building (Call-in provided via Microsoft
Teams)
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Al
Major (City of Bayonne), Suzanne Cavanaugh (City of Bayonne), Sean Ream (NJDOT),
Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and
TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Completed the Utility Risk Assessment Plan (Activity 2175)
o Completed the Complete Streets Checklist
o Updated the project risk register based on NJDOT comments at CD CRAW.
o Utility Coordination
PSE&G: received revised cost estimate on 7/14/23 ($1.8M)
-
Mr. Lester noted that the CD level construction cost estimates provided earlier in
the year had a total utility relocation cost of approximately $1.8M (this included
PSE&G, Verizon, and Altice USA/Cablevision). Now that Verizon and Altice
USA/Cablevision relocations are minimized, the total utility relocation cost for the
project has essentially remain unchanged.
Altice USA/Optimum: Received contact information from City, contacted Marilyn Davis
to make her aware of the project and to get her input. She’s available to help facilitate
as needed
2. Activities in progress:
o Alternatives Analysis
Finalizing GP&Es and construction staging plans
Progressing ROW and Access Impact Plan and Matrix
Finalizing Alternatives Analysis Report
o Preparing for the Public Information Center
PIC Notification Letter (sent 7/17), Legal Notices (set to print 7/20 & 7/31), Social Media
Posts, Display Boards, PowerPoint Presentation, updates to project website, etc.
o Draft Concept Development Report is in progress
3. Activities planned for next month:
o Issue CD CRAW minutes
o Submit draft Alternatives Analysis Report to City for review
o Submit draft CD Report to City for review
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #10 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Hold Public Information Center
o Attend City Council meeting
4. Open Discussion
o Tentative Schedule to Completion
CD CRAW: June 29th
Submit Draft Alternatives Analysis Report: July 20th
Hold in-person Public Information Center: August 2nd
Submit Draft CD Report to City for review: August 18th
-
This first draft would not include the Resolution of Support from the City.
-
Aim to receive comments from City: August 31st
-
Finish addressing City’s comments: September 8th
Present alternatives and recommended PPA to City Council at Caucus meeting: August
9th
Attend City Council meeting and receive Resolution of Support: August 16th
Submit Draft CD Report to NJDOT for review: September 8th
o Public Information Center Questions
What time can we get in to set-up?
-
TYLin and Sam Schwartz can access the Council Chambers as early as the building
opens which is at 8:30am.
Review of draft social media post
-
Physical copy of draft social media post was passed around and TYLin will send an
electronic copy to the City after the meeting.
Discussion on content of boards
-
TYLin is preparing six display boards to present: 1) Rendering of PPA; 2) General
Plan, Elevation, and Section; 3) Local Detour Route for Overnight Closure of Rt.
440; 4) Through Traffic Detour Route for Overnight Closure of Rt. 440 and Detour
Route for Closure of Port Terminal Blvd.; 5) Photos of Existing Conditions; 6)
Preliminary Construction Scheme
-
TYLin will send a draft copy of the proposed display boards to the City for their
review and comment prior to printing.
-
Mr. Raichle asked that in the typical section view on board 2, TYLin change the
figure riding the bicycle to a figure walking a bicycle so as not to indicate that
riding of bicycles will be condoned in the proposed bridge.
TYLin and the City of Bayonne coordinated proposed responses to frequently asked
questions they anticipate receiving during the PIC. Some of these questions/topics
included:
-
Project schedule/timeline/when construction will start
-
Project funding
-
Location of proposed bridge
o Scheduling of Interagency Review Coordination Meeting
o Sean Ream from the NJDOT Bureau of Environmental Program Resources asked to be invited
to future progress meetings. TYLin will add him to the invite list.
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #10 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees, P. Miranda (NJDOT)
Progress Meeting #11
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #11 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #11 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Sean Ream (NJDOT), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester
(TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, August 15, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT, and
TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Completed Alternative Analysis (Activity 2300)
o Held Public Information Center (Activity 2460)
o Issued CD CRAW minutes on 7/26
o Met with NJ Transit regarding ROW/Access/Jurisdiction
o Attended City Council Caucus Meeting
2. Activities in progress:
o Draft Concept Development Report is in progress
Undergoing internal QC review prior to submittal to City
o PE Public Involvement Action Plan under review by TYLin
o PE Scope Statement in progress
3. Activities planned for next month:
o Submit draft CD Report to City, address comments, and submit to NJDOT
o Receive Resolution of Support from City Council
o Submit Alternatives Analysis Report to City for documentation
o Issue Public Information Center Summary
4. Open Discussion
o Tentative Schedule to Completion
CD CRAW: June 29th
Hold in-person Public Information Center: August 2nd
Present alternatives and recommended PPA to City Council at Caucus meeting: August
9th
Attend City Council meeting and receive Resolution of Support: August 16th
Submit Draft CD Report to City for review: August 18th
1. This first draft would not include the Resolution of Support from the City.
2. Aim to receive comments from City: August 31st
3. Finish addressing City’s comments: September 8th
Submit Alternatives Analysis Report: September 8th
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #11 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Submit Draft CD Report to NJDOT for review: September 8th
o Discussion of scope of work for PE phase
TYLin can prepare an outline of the work to be performed in the PE phase and the City’s
traffic engineer will use the outline along with the PE Scope Statement to prepare the
scope of work to be included in the RFP for the next phase of the project.
o It is expected that the Resolution of Support from the City will be received after the City
Council meeting on 8/16/23.
o Review of CD Report
After the City has reviewed and commented on the draft CD Report, TYLin will send the
draft CD Report to NJDOT Local Aid (Paul Miranda) and NJDOT BEPR (Sean Ream) for
their internal review. After the NJDOT has reviewed the draft CD Report, they will
forward it to the reviewers at the FHWA for their review.
o IRC Meeting
The IRC meeting will be scheduled by NJDOT Local Aid once they and the FHWA have
reviewed the report.
o NJTPA will send a letter to the City of Bayonne noting that they approve the CD Report and
can move to the next phase.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
City Council Meeting and Minutes
City Council Caucus Meeting Presentation
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne | Bayonne, NJ
August 9th, 2023
2
2
Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Purpose
The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting
pedestrians and bicyclists from the east side of Route 440 just south of
Goldsborough Drive to the west side of Route 440 at the 34th Street light rail
station
Project Need
Pedestrian and Bicycle
- No safe pedestrian crossing in the project vicinity. Closest is at grade ~0.25 miles south
- Increased need for residents west of Route 440 to access destinations around PABH
- Increased need for residents of PABH to access 34th Street light rail station
3
3
Purpose & Need and Project Goals
Project Goals
Safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Rt. 440 in vicinity of
Goldsborough Dr.
Keep the public and stakeholders informed through all phases
Encourage the public use of the new pedestrian crossing
Minimize impacts to Rt. 440, stakeholders, and utilities
Maintain a 17’-0” minimum underclearance to bridge and the
required sight distance to traffic signal
Minimize impacts to traffic on Rt. 440 and Goldsborough Dr.
during construction
4
4
Alt. 1: Goldsborough Dr. At-grade Crossing
Pros
- Least expensive alternative
- Shortest construction duration
-
One construction season
- Limited impact to Rt. 440 traffic during construction
-
Temporary closure of Rt. 440 SB shoulder
- Relocation of overhead utilities not required
- Limited excavation and disposal of historic fill
Cons
- Creates conflict between vehicles and ped
- Addition of Rt. 440 Crosswalk degrades signal operations to LOS
F (worst case)
- Major Development per SWM Regulations
- Requires roadway improvements, upgrades to the existing traffic
signal and removal of existing cantilever sign structure
5
5
Alternative 3: Two-Span Sleek Concrete
Pros
-
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing
-
No impact to intersection LOS
-
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components
-
Minor drainage improvements required
Cons
-
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
-
Longest construction duration: two construction seasons
-
Two overnight closures of Rt. 440 required for falsework
construction and deconstruction
-
Multiple lane shifts of Rt. 440 required for different work stages
-
Snow removal maintenance required
6
6
Alternative 4: Single-Span Simple Bridge
Pros
-
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing
-
Least expensive “build” alternative
-
Moderate construction duration: one construction season
-
No impact to intersection LOS
-
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction
-
Minor drainage improvements required
Cons
-
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
-
Lacks architectural/aesthetic components
-
One overnight closure of Rt. 440 required for installation of
girders
-
Snow removal maintenance required
7
7
Alternative 2: Single-Span Steel Truss (PPA)
Pros
-
Provides ADA compliant, grade-separated crossing
-
Moderate construction duration: one construction season
-
No impact to intersection LOS
-
Simpler temporary traffic control during construction
-
Covered bridge eliminates snow removal maintenance
-
Incorporates architectural/aesthetic components
-
Minor drainage improvements required
Cons
-
Most expensive “build” alternative
-
Relocation of overhead utilities along Rt. 440 NB required
-
One overnight closure of Rt. 440 required for installation of truss
8
8
Staff Recommended PPA
BRIDGE FEATURES
Single span, covered, pre-fabricated steel truss bridge
Fully enclosed stairs and elevator building at east landing
Sidewalk at east landing connects to sidewalk on Goldsborough Dr. and at Port Terminal Blvd.
Proposed bridge connects directly to existing light rail station bridge
Chain-link fencing provided on bridge over roadway
12’-0” wide internal bridge opening provides safe accommodation for bicyclists and pedestrians
9
9
Staff Recommended PPA
BENEFITS
Above-ground pedestrian bridge provides safest method for crossing Rt. 440
Connection to existing pedestrian bridge provides direct access to and from
the 34th St. light rail
Stair and elevator system provides compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA)
Future traffic at the Rt. 440 and Goldsborough Dr. intersection will not be
impacted.
UTILITIES
Aerial electric utility lines will be re-located underground
Aerial telecommunications utility lines will be lowered slightly to
accommodate proposed bridge
Underground oil/gas/petroleum pipelines will not be impacted by
proposed bridge
CONSTRUCTABILITY
Stage 1: Relocate aerial electric utilities underground, lower aerial telephone
and cable utilities, construct east landing containing stairs and elevator
Stage 2: Lift pre-fabricated bridge into place utilizing a one-night, weekend
closure of Rt. 440
Three lanes of Rt. 440 northbound will be shifted slightly towards the
median to accommodate construction. All lanes of traffic will be maintained
Closure of Port Terminal Blvd. ramp to Rt. 440 NB required. Detour to be
implemented
10
10
Staff Recommended PPA | Construction Sequence & MPT
11
11
Staff Recommended PPA
Rendering of Preliminary Preferred Alternative | Looking Southwest
12
Rendering of Preliminary Preferred Alternative from CVS Parking Lot | Looking West
Staff Recommended PPA
13
Rendering of Preliminary Preferred Alternative from Rt. 440 Northbound | Looking North
Staff Recommended PPA
14
14
Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates
Alternative 4
Alternative 3
Alternative 2
(PPA)
Alternative 1
$4.12 M
$5.70 M
$8.28 M
$0.74 M
Construction
$1.80 M
$1.80 M
$1.80 M
$0.06 M
Utility Relocations
$5.92 M
$7.50 M
$10.08 M
$0.80 M
Total
!" # $%& $% ' ( ) * % %+!$ $( $ , $) - % . /
01234546214789:8;<28;
=>?@?A0BCDEF4GDCH41I481IDCG7JD7KC24;ALEDDMD81N7OPQRSTUVVW4ODOBIX;E2:54G
Y$+ )%Z- % + + % &$%% &$% #. . [ # %+ % ) $\ ( &]) + [ )$(Y %
2JJ54G21478CC:3M411D;3X2JJ54G281C^;DFD57JDEC1I21H455481E7;:GD8DHCDHDEK57H48171ID
_%Z Y '`a(()& $%b-c %+
=>?@?A0B414C2JJE7JE421D17I2FD1ID2JJ54G281^;DFD57JDEJ2X1IDG7C17K1IDM7;D548L
28;2825XC4CG788DG1D;H41I41CAJJ54G21478<87HB1IDEDK7ED
Nd=Be>?@?9d@?Bf?ge@?0dhi?j3X1IDk:84G4J25P7:8G457K1IDP41X7Kf2X788D
2CK7557HCl
mOn
eID2K7EDMD81478D;EDG4125C2ED48G7EJ7E21D;IDED482C1I7:LIK:55XCD1K7E1I21
5D8L1IO
ROn
A82MD8;MD8117ALEDDMD81N7OPQRSTUVVH41IeokACC7G421DCBVUUfE72;2GEDC
p [ q "] rstq uv twttx '`yz{b- Y %+%Z Y $ ))$# . .+ ])&
M7;D548LH7E|G788DG1D;H41I7E8DGDCC4121D;3X1IDEDF4DH28;2825XC4C7K2
J2E14G:52E;DFD57JMD812JJ54G21$% } ( + \ $Y . (()& }) + [ )$( & $#
2GG7:812CJ2E17K1IDD8L48DDE48LEDF4DHG7C1C2CC7G421D;H41I1ID4E2JJ54G21478
482GG7E;28GDH41I1IDE21DC481IDKDDCGID;:5DC:3M411D;H41I481IDEDCJ78CD17
. / ~] \$ ] )\& $%!* $J7C25CC:3M411D;3Xeok;21D;28:2EX
SBRURSHI4GI4C78K45DH41I1IDP41XP5DE|4CIDED3X2:1I7E46D;O
SOn
y. Y$]% $\ ]&. ( Y % \ $Y + [ )$( & $# &&$]% ].$ + ](
172G:M:5214FD171257KUBUUUK7E255C:GIJ2XMD81C;:E48L1IDD4C148LG781E2G1
JDE47;O
VOn
y. ( Y % Y + \ $Y + [ )$( & $# \$ ( &\& ( $
& (
28;2J2E1KE7M1ID5:MJC:MKDD7KSUBUUU5:MJC:MKDDK7E1IDLD8DE25
IX;E2:54GC1:;X28;EDJ7E1CJDG4K4D;481ID7E4L4825G781E2G1HI4GI4C173DJ24;
KE7MK:8;C|87H8173D. )+ } . !" # $%& $% '
( ) * % %+!$ $( $ , $) - % . / " }) $% ]%+
JEDF47:C5X2:1I7E46D;3X@DC75:1478RSTURTmTUUO
On
eIDP41Xf:C48DCCA;M484C1E217EBPI4DK94828G425dKK4GDEBh2Hj4EDG17E28;
0JDG425hDL25P7:8CD5;D2548LH41I14541Xk211DECB2CHD552C1ID?8L48DDE28;
( $%% ) [ #%Z %+ Y % Z%Z + [ )$(Y % (()& $% %+ + [ )$(
DCGE7H783DI25K7K1IDP41X2ED2:1I7E46D;1712|D28X2G147828;2MD8;28;
DDG:1D28XG781E2G1C28;;7G:MD81C783DI25K7K1IDP41X7Kf2X788D2CM2X3D
8DGDCC2EX17DKKDG1:21D1ID237FDO
On
024;2H2E;4CC:3DG117eokD81DE48L2HE411D8G781E2G1K7E1IDCDCDEF4GDC
C:3C12814255X48G78K7EM28GDH41I297EM7KP781E2G12MD8;MD812C2JJE7FD;3X
1IDP41Xh2Hj4EDG17E28;48G7EJ7E2148L28X2;;41478251DEMC28;G78;41478CCD1
K7E1I1IDED48O
On
eI4CG781E2G14CM2;DH41I7:1G7MJD1414FD34;482GG7E;28GDH41INOO0OAOVUAlmmT
<8714GD7K1I4C2G1478CI2553DJ:354CID;28;2G7JX7K1I4CEDC75:147828;1ID
G781E2G12F245235DK7EJ:354G48CJDG14782CED:4ED;3X52HO
On
eI4CEDC75:1478CI25512|DDKKDG14MMD;421D5XO
QD2CTP7:8G45kDM3DECf77|DEBP2EE755BDED6B=D4MMDE28;EDC4;D81h2D5:C2O
P7:8G45kDM3DE=D4MMDEM7FD;1IDK7557H48LEDC75:1478BCDG78;D;3XP7:8G45kDM3DE
f77|DEHI4GIH2CED2;3X1IDP5DE|28;2;7J1D;
/ $)]$% "](($ %Z . $\ $%% uvpy 'u # v p ( Y % $\ y %($ $%-
h7G25P78GDJ1jDFD57JMD8101:;X
=>?@?A0B1IDP41X7Kf2X788DI2C;D1DEM48D;1I212JD;DC1E4283E4;LD4C8DD;D;17;D25H41I
C2KD1X28;481DEG788DG14F41X171IDAf>WD848C:5221f2X788D>2E37EBK7EMDE5X|87H82C1ID
k45412EXdGD28eDEM4825Bf2X788DB7EkdefQBK2G4541X<28;
=>?@?A0B:C48L2KD;DE255XK:8;D;h7G25P78GDJ1jDFD57JMD81WhPjJE7GDCC
2;M484C1DED;3X1IDN7E1IDECDXeE28CJ7E121478528848LA:1I7E41XWNeABf2X788DI2C
G78;:G1D;2C1:;X174;D814KX28;DF25:21DF4235D28;KD2C435D3E4;LD3:45;48L251DE8214FDC<28;
=>?@?A0B1IDNeA28;1IDNjdeWNDHDECDXjDJ2E1MD817KeE28CJ7E121478I2FD3DD8
MDM3DEC7K1IDC1:;X1D2MH41I1IDP41X7Kf2X788D28;I2FD3DD8481DLE25171IDJE7GDCC17
;21D<28;
!"
#
!"$%
&
$$%&
$'
&
$
$%
% $ (
)
$ $ ( *
$
$$
)
&
% $ (
)
$ & $ ( *
%
)
$%
$
+,-./+012.+-345/.678-9:4:;382.78-<-88-1.=9+-8;3+:>-?@.A,:B,.:/.8-<-88-1.+C.3;1.1-/:D;3+-1.3/.
)
& &
$ E
FGG
HIJGKLMNOLNMJGPQRRGSJGOTUJMJVGSWGXGMTTYGXZVGYNRRGIJQ[ILGOIXQZ\RQZ]GYJZOQZ[GPQRRGSJG^MTUQVJVG
XRTZ[GSTLIGJV[JKGTYGLIJGSMQV[JGTUJMGLIJGMTXVPXW_GHIJGSMQV[J`KGPJKLGJZVGPQRRGOTZZJOLGVQMJOLRWG
LTGLIJGJaQKLQZ[GbcGHMXZKQLG^JVJKLMQXZGKLMNOLNMJGXZVGLIJGJXKLGJZVGLTGXG^MT^TKJVGJXKLGRXZVQZ[G
KLMNOLNMJ_GHIJGJXKLGRXZVQZ[GPQRRGSJGYNRRWGJZORTKJVGXZVGPQRRGOTZLXQZGXGKLXQMOXKJGXZVGJRJUXLTM_G
dTZOMJLJGKQVJPXR]GPQRRGSJGOTZKLMNOLJVGXRTZ[GeL_GffgGZTMLISTNZVGLTGOTZZJOLGhTRVKSTMTN[IG
iM_GXZVGjTMLGHJMkQZXRGlRUV_GHIQKGKQVJPXR]GPQRRGXRKTG^MTUQVJGXOOJKKGLTGLIJGJXKLGRXZVQZ[GTYG
LIJG^MT^TKJVG^JVJKLMQXZGSMQV[Jm
$$ ) $
%$ )
& #
&
%
'
&n
opq oprsq
& $
t ' $ r) $ $
$
u
r
$
*
v
&
)&&
&
u
r
$
$$
&
)
&
t ' $ r) $ $
$ (
* &
%
stwr
$'
& n ' &
&o
p
%
$$
&
)&
)
%% )* %
&
stwr
&
$ &
%& oprsq
n &t
x
y
z'
%
n #' {
t
x
||||||||||
}~'
%' ) &
% '
%{
% '# $
'
&n
u
A:+,.
..=..=.=..@..6;+:+2.?.3;1.
..=.
.=.=..@..6;+:+2.? o p
%
$
)
$
$$ &%
u
n #o p
@.<C8.+,-.8C-8+:-/.<C84-892.;CA;.3/.+,-.
+.C/-,/.,08B,./:+-/.C;.=>-;0-..3;1
&
E
&x*
& $$ ) '
&n
%
#
$$
&
%
$ & % '
$
&
F
!"
qu
&& &&
%
&
$$
*
!%"
C.+,-.-/+.C<. 0;:B:39:+2/.;CA9-1D-@.+,-8-.-¡:/+/.;C.1-<309+@.8-3B,.C8.>:C93+:C;.
%
$ u
*
Progress Meeting #12
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #12 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #12 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, September 12, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World),
Paul Miranda (NJDOT), Michael Camerlengo (TYLin PM), Jim Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne, the NJDOT,
and TYLin to provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Issued PIC Summary on 8/17.
o Received Resolution of Support from City on 8/23.
o Submitted Draft CD Report to City of Bayonne on 8/24.
o Submitted revised Draft CD Report to City of Bayonne on 9/11.
Mr. Raichle noted that they trust all of the City’s comments were addressed and that
their comments are closed.
2. Activities in progress:
o Review of Draft CD Report by NJDOT.
TYLin will send the draft CD Report to Mr. Miranda and Mr. Ream via a Microsoft One
Drive link; they will need about a week to review.
Mr. Miranda will work to have the NJDOT send the draft CD Report to the FHWA for
their review.
3. Activities planned for next month:
o Receive and address comments from the NJDOT.
o Receive and address comments from the FHWA.
o Submit Final CD Report.
o Attend IRC Meeting.
4. Open Discussion
o Tentative Schedule to Completion
CD CRAW: June 29th
Hold in-person Public Information Center: August 2nd
Present alternatives and recommended PPA to City Council at Caucus meeting: August
9th
Attend City Council meeting and receive Resolution of Support: August 16th
Submit Draft CD Report to City for review: August 25th
1. Aim to receive comments from City: August 31st
Submit Draft CD Report to NJDOT for review: September 12th
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #12 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
o Scheduling or IRC Meeting
The IRC meeting will be scheduled by the NJDOT while the FHWA is reviewing the Draft
CD Report.
o Written scope of work for pe phase.
Mr. Raichle and Ms. Mack believe that it is within TYLin’s scope of work for the CD phase
and that they have remaining budget to provide the PE phase scope of work to be
included in the RFP for the next phase. Mr. Raichle and Ms. Mack noted that TYLin
preparing the scope of work for the next phase of the project would not preclude them
from proposing on and having the potential to win the next phase of the project.
Mr. Miranda also noted that he does not think that TYLin will be precluded from the PE
Phase by preparing the scope of work for the RFP.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees
Progress Meeting #13
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
City of Bayonne, NJ
Progress Meeting #13 Minutes
An Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D/V
100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 510 | Rockaway, New Jersey 07866 | T 908.850.3366 | F 877.453.3878 | www.tylin.com
Project:
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Concept Development Study
Subject:
Progress Meeting #13 Minutes
Date:
Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Location:
Virtual via Microsoft Teams
Attachments:
None
Attendees:
Sue Mack (Bayonne), Andy Raichle (Matrix New World), Phil Scott (Matrix New World), Jim
Lester (TYLin DPM)
MEETING MINUTES
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023, a progress meeting was held between the City of Bayonne and TYLin to
provide the status of the project. Below is a summary of the key discussion outcomes.
1. Activities completed since last progress meeting:
o Submitted Draft CD Report to NJDOT on 9/12.
o Received comments from NJDOT BSBPP on 10/16.
2. Activities in progress:
o BSBPP’s comments on Draft CD Report are addressed, compiling revised CD Report today.
o PE Phase Scope of Work document currently under QC review.
o Constructability Risk Report under QC review.
o CD Phase PowerPoint presentation and narrative in progress.
3. Activities planned for next month (to mid-November):
o Receive and address comments from the FHWA.
o Submit Final CD Report.
o Attend IRC Meeting.
4. Open Discussion
o Scheduling or IRC Meeting
Mr. Lester will call Mr. Miranda to discuss the scheduling of the IRC meeting.
This memorandum of record is believed to be an accurate record of the discussions at this meeting. If any
of the attendees disagree with the documented discussion, please contact Jim Lester at (908) 441-7143
or at Jim.Lester@tylin.com within 5 days of receipt of these minutes. If no comments are received, then
this memorandum will be considered a true and accurate record of the meeting.
_________________________
Jim Lester
Deputy Project Manager, TYLin
C:
Attendees, P. Miranda (NJDOT), S. Ream (NJDOT), M. Camerlengo (TYLin)
Email Confirming Number of Elevator
Cabs Required
1
Jim Lester
From:
Andrew Raichle <araichle@mnwe.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, March 1, 2023 7:56 AM
To:
Jim Lester; Suzanne Mack; Suzanne Mack; Phil Scott
Cc:
Michael Camerlengo
Subject:
RE: Bayonne: Pedestrian Bridge - Number of Elevator Cabs Requirement
The City has no requirements, nor do we have a desire, for a second elevator. andy
From: Jim Lester <jim.lester@tylin.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 3:20 PM
To: Suzanne Mack <smack@baynj.org>; Suzanne Mack <bayonneplanner@gmail.com>; Andrew Raichle
<araichle@mnwe.com>; Phil Scott <pscott@mnwe.com>
Cc: Michael Camerlengo <michael.camerlengo@tylin.com>
Subject: Bayonne: Pedestrian Bridge - Number of Elevator Cabs Requirement
[EXTERNAL]
Good afternoon all,
As a follow up to one of our action items from our progress meeting last Tuesday 2/21, TYLin internally discussed the
number of elevator cabs required for the proposed pedestrian bridge.
In our experience, multiple elevator cabs are only required by certain clients where the local government requires that a
second elevator be available in the event that one has to be taken out of service for maintenance purposes.
-
The benefit of providing two elevators is that if one cab had to be taken out of service for maintenance, you’d
always have a second, ADA compliant way of crossing Route 440 by using the new bridge.
-
The downsides of providing two elevators are that a second elevator would cost more (we’re currently reaching
out to Otis and ThyssenKrupp for estimates), and the structural footprint of the east landing may be larger,
leaving less room for underground utilities.
-
If only one elevator were provided and needed to be temporarily taken out of service for maintenance,
pedestrians requiring ADA compliant access across Route 440 could still use the pedestrian crosswalk across
Route 440 at Lefante Way/E 32nd Street.
-
It may be important to note that the existing pedestrian facility on NJ Transit’s property only has one elevator at
the parking lot side and one elevator on the station platform.
So, we believe that requiring two elevators in the proposed east landing would come down to any local requirement
that Bayonne has, or the City’s preference.
Jim Lester, PE
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
T 908.441.7143
M 732.512.8699
E jim.lester@tylin.com
TYLin
100 Enterprise Drive Suite 510
Rockaway, NJ 07866, United States
TYLin.com
Appendix R
Cost Estimates
515 |
360 |
523 |
Alternative 1
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 1 of 9
Project Subtotal
Other Major Project Items
Item
Project Subtotal =
$182,000
$117,820
$9,420
$43,019
Landscape
General Items
Alternative 1 - At-Grade Crossing - Engineer's Estimate - Summary
Work Type Subtotals
$6,761
$17,805
$6,400
Work Type
Earthwork
Pavement
Traffic
Drainage
Roadway
Amount
15,329.01
$
26,825.77
$
3,832.25
$
383,225.28
$
19,161.26
$
30,000
10% of Project Subtotal
$
0
6,000
8,000
15,000
Choice
4% of Project Subtotal
7% of Project Subtotal
1% of Project Subtotal
5% of Project Subtotal
9% of Project Subtotal
34,490.28
$
-
$
15,000.00
$
220,000
490,000
890,000
Project Subtotal Range
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 5.0
5.0 & above
$
7,000
20,000
42,000
87,000
160,000
45,000
115,000
220,000
240,000
250,000
490,000
30,000
40,000
58,000
$
15,000
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Lighting, Signs, and Delineators
Maintenance of Traffic
Training
Mobilization
Progress Schedule
Clearing Site
Construction Layout
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
504,863.85
$
Project Total =
7,000.00
$
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 2 of 9
Contingencies & Escallation
ROW Cost
If there is no ROW cost on the project, indicate "No ROW" in the box.
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies for Construction Change Order
For State Funded Projects, Contingencies for Change Orders = 0
Utility Relocations by Companies/Owners
Summary
Contingencies
x (1+C)
1.03
540,810.16
$
x 1 + [0.01(Y)]
1.04
Y = Number of years until
midpoint of construction
duration. If Y<2, no
escallation required.
Construction Cost for
CD Estimate
504,863.85
$
Project Total
0.5 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 15.0
15.0 and above
Construction Change Order Contingency Amount
$6,000
5-20
Contingencies (C ) Percent
3%
2.5%
Average Construction Duration in Years
1
2
Project Cost (in millions)
Less than 1.0
3
2%
Over 20
NO ROW
% of Construction Cost
31.1%
Project Cost (Mil.)
0-5
Total Estimate Without Utilities
-
$
-
$
PSE&G Electric Underground Relocation
Verizon Underground Relocation
Cablevision/Altice USA Underground Relocation
20.3%
16.2%
12.2%
168,191.96
$
$25,000
$25,000 + 4% of amount in excess of $500,000
$205,000 + 3% of amount in excess of $5,000,000
$355,000 + 2% of amount in excess of $10,000,000
1.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 & above
Construction Engineering Amount
Contingencies =
$26,632
$500,000
Ttl. Federal Participating Items in Millions of $
0 to 0.1
0.1 to 0.5
735,634.52
$
Construction Estimate for CD
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies
Utilities: Relocation by Companies
Total Estimate With Utilities
540,810.16
$
168,191.96
$
26,632.41
$
64,897.22
$
800,531.74
$
Known Utility Relocation Subtotl =
-
$
64,897.22
$
12.0%
540,810.16
$
% (12% Urban, 5.5% Rural)
Construction Cost for CD Estimate
General Utility Relocations
Utility Relocation Cost
for CD Estimate
Known Utility Relocations
Amount
-
$
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 3 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
202009P
CY
93
$35.00
$3,255
202021P
SY
67
$18.00
$1,206
203021P
CY
115
$20.00
$2,300
$6,761
Earthwork Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Roadway Excavation Unclassified
Removal of Pavement
I-14 Soil Aggregate
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 4 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
302036P
SY
140
$10.00
$1,400
401009P
SY
735
$5.00
$3,675
401054M
Ton
103
$100.00
$10,300
401084M
Ton
27
$90.00
$2,430
$17,805
Pavement Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Dense-Graded Aggregate Base Course, 6” Thick
HMA Milling, 3” or Less
Hot Mix Asphalt 12.5 M 64 Surface Course
Hot Mix Asphalt 25 M 64 Base Course
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 5 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
702027P
LF
450
$3.00
$1,350
702030P
LF
450
$5.00
$2,250
702039M
UNIT
2
$1,000.00
$2,000
702042M
UNIT
2
$400.00
$800
$6,400
SUBTOTAL
Traffic Work Items
Traffic Signal Cable, 2 Conductor
Traffic Signal Cable, 5 Conductor
Pedestrian Signal Head
Push Button
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 6 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
602012M
UNIT
5
$6,000.00
$30,000
602018M
UNIT
1
$6,000.00
$6,000
601124P
LF
325
$200.00
$65,000
602057M
UNIT
1
$6,000.00
$6,000
602229M
UNIT
1
$75,000.00
$75,000
$182,000
Drainage Work Items
SUBTOTAL
INLET, TYPE B
INLET, TYPE E
18" Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Manhole, 5' Diameter
Manufactured Treatment Device
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 7 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
609003M
LF
310
$35.00
$10,850
606012P
SY
344
$60.00
$20,640
606084P
SY
2
$300.00
$600
607018P
LF
625
$30.00
$18,750
608003P
SY
130
$80.00
$10,400
609027M
UNIT
1
$2,500.00
$2,500
609039M
UNIT
1
$1,000.00
$1,000
609075M
LF
480
$5.00
$2,400
610006M
LF
680
$1.00
$680
512XXX
Removal of Cantilever Sign Support Structure
LS
1
$50,000.00
$50,000
$117,820
Roadway Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Beam Guide Rail
Concrete Sidewalk, 4" Thick
Detectable Warning Surface
9” x 16” Concrete Vertical Curb
Tangent Guide Rail Terminal
Beam Guide Rail Anchorage
Removal of Beam Guide Rail
Traffic Stripes, 6”
Nonvegetative Surface, Hot Mix Asphalt
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 8 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Planting (Mainline) (Length of Project in Miles)
Mile
0.06
$64,500.00
$3,870
804000P
Topsoil Spreading, 4” Thick
SY
370
$5.00
$1,850
806006P
Fertilizing and Seeding, Type A-3
SY
370
$5.00
$1,850
809003M
SY
370
$5.00
$1,850
$9,420
Landscape Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Straw Mulching
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 1 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: A. Ferri Date: 20230314
Checker: M. Troncone Date: 20230316
Sheet: 9 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Miles
0.06
$44,260.00
$2,656
-
Miles
0.06
$28,970.00
$1,738
-
Miles
0.06
$643,758.00
$38,625
$43,019
General Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Field Office
Materials Field Laboratory
Erosion Control During Construction
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/19/2023, 1:50 PM
Alternative 2
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 1 of 9
Project Subtotal
Other Major Project Items
Item
Project Subtotal =
$64,490
$121,016
$26,370
$8,256
Landscape
General Items
Alternative 2 - Steel Truss - Engineer's Estimate - Summary
Work Type Subtotals
$10,797
$47,695
$4,956,498
Work Type
Earthwork
Pavement
Bridge
Drainage
Incidental Items
45,000.00
$
87,000.00
$
8,000.00
$
523,512.28
$
Amount
157,053.68
$
366,458.59
$
52,351.23
$
5,235,122.76
$
30,000
10% of Project Subtotal
$
0
6,000
8,000
15,000
Choice
3% of Project Subtotal
7% of Project Subtotal
1% of Project Subtotal
% of Project Subtotal
9% of Project Subtotal
220,000
490,000
890,000
Project Subtotal Range
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 5.0
5.0 & above
$
7,000
20,000
42,000
87,000
160,000
45,000
115,000
220,000
240,000
250,000
490,000
30,000
40,000
58,000
$
15,000
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Lighting, Traffic Stripes, Signs, and Delineators
Maintenance of Traffic
Training
Mobilization
Progress Schedule
Clearing Site
Assumed $45,000
because there are no
trees on this site)
Construction Layout
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
6,474,498.54
$
Project Toal =
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 2 of 9
Contingencies & Escallation
ROW Cost
If there is no ROW cost on the project, indicate "No ROW" in the box.
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies for Construction Change Order
For State Funded Projects, Contingencies for Change Orders = 0
Utility Relocations by Companies/Owners
Summary
Contingencies
x (1+C)
1.025
6,901,815.44
$
x 1 + [0.01(Y)]
1.04
Y = Number of years until
midpoint of construction
duration. If Y<2, no
escallation required.
Construction Cost for
CD Estimate
6,474,498.54
$
Project Total
0.5 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 15.0
15.0 and above
Construction Change Order Contingency Amount
$6,000
5-20
Contingencies (C ) Percent
3%
2.5%
Average Construction Duration in Years
1
2
Project Cost (in millions)
Less than 1.0
3
2%
Over 20
NO ROW
% of Construction Cost
31.1%
Project Cost (Mil.)
0-5
Known Utility Relocation Subtotl =
1,800,000.00
$
Known Utility Relocations
Amount
1,800,000.00
$
PSE&G, Verizon, Cablevision/Altice USA
20.3%
16.2%
12.2%
1,118,094.10
$
$25,000
$25,000 + 4% of amount in excess of $500,000
$205,000 + 3% of amount in excess of $5,000,000
$355,000 + 2% of amount in excess of $10,000,000
1.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 & above
Construction Engineering Amount
Contingencies =
262,054.46
$
$500,000
Ttl. Federal Participating Items in Millions of $
0 to 0.1
0.1 to 0.5
Construction Estimate for CD
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies
Utilities: Relocation by Companies
Total Estimate With Utilities
6,901,815.44
$
1,118,094.10
$
262,054.46
$
1,800,000.00
$
10,081,964.00
$
8,281,964.00
$
Total Estimate Without Utilities
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 3 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
202003P
AC
1
$10,797.00
$10,797
$10,797
Earthwork Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Stripping
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 4 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
610036M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610006M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610039M
SF
700
$3.00
$2,100
610009M
SF
700
$5.00
$3,500
401099M
TON
92
$192.00
$17,664
401042M
TON
35
$198.00
$6,831
302048P
SY
200
$28.00
$5,600
$47,695
Pavement Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Removal of Traffic Stripes
Traffic Stripes, 6"
Removal of Traffic Markings
Traffic Markings
Hot Mix Asphalt 9.5 M 64 Surface Course
Hot Mix Asphalt 25 M 64 Base Course
Dense-Graded Aggregate Base Course, 12" Thick
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: DF Date: 3/17/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 5 of 9
TYPE:
Steel Truss
LENGTH
137
x WIDTH
12.25
= AREA
1,678
SF
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
East Landing
Stair Landing Concrete
CY
300
$1,520.00
$456,000
Landing Reinforcement
LB
3,617
$4.50
$16,278
Elevator Foundation Concrete
CY
32
$1,520.00
$48,790
Foundation Reinforcement
LB
5,617
$4.50
$25,278
14 " Driven Piles
LF
300
$300.00
$90,000
Stainless Steel Frame at Elevator & Stairs
LB
52,285
$12.00
$627,419
Stair tower Roofing
LB
6,380
$4.00
$25,521
Glazing
SF
3,990
$120.00
$478,800
Elevator
LS
1
$400,000.00
$400,000
Steel for stairs
LB
6,431
$4.00
$25,725
Precast Concrete steps
EA
44
$90.00
$3,960
Excavation
CY
325
$250.00
$81,340
Backfill
CY
263
$250.00
$65,692
Main Span
Structural Steel
LB
94,262
$4.00
$377,049
Concrete Deck
CY
47
$1,520.00
$71,341
Deck Reinforcement
LB
10,560
$4.50
$47,522
Concrete Column
CY
0
$1,520.00
$0
Column Reinforcement
LB
0
$4.50
$0
CIDH Pile Excavation
LF
0
$4,000.00
$0
CIDH Pile Concrete
CY
0
$600.00
$0
CIDH Pile Reinforcement
LB
0
$2.20
$0
Miscellaneous
Steel Bridge Roof
LB
27,118
$7.00
$189,828
Glazing for steel bridge
SF
4,258
$120.00
$510,955
Architectural Bridge Railing
LF
0
$500.00
$0
Handrailing (stairs)
LF
120
$50.00
$6,000
Bearings
EA
4
$3,287.00
$13,148
Expansion Joints
LF
29
$731.00
$20,834
Functional Lighting
LS
1
$30,000.00
$30,000
Archtiectural Lighting
LS
1
$30,000.00
$30,000
HVAC for machine room
LS
1
$20,000.00
$20,000
Electrical
LS
1
$10,000.00
$10,000
$0
$3,671,480
$2,188
Total Estimated Cost
$3,671,480
Estimated $/SF
$2,187.68
Contingency:
35%
$1,285,018
Total with Contingency:
35%
$4,956,498
$2,953.37
Bridge Work Items
SUBTOTAL
SQUARE FOOT COST (TOTAL)
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
JPL
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 6 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
602012M
UNIT
3
$7,330.00
$21,990
601122P
LF
140
$175.00
$24,500
602057M
UNIT
3
$6,000.00
$18,000
$64,490
Drainage Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Inlet, Type B
15" Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Manhole, 5' Diameter
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 7 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
609003M
LF
700
$26.00
$18,200
509030P
LF
700
$56.88
$39,816
606012P
SY
400
$60.00
$24,000
607034P
LF
600
$55.00
$33,000
609027M
UNIT
1
$2,500.00
$2,500
609039M
UNIT
1
$1,000.00
$1,000
609075M
LF
500
$5.00
$2,500
$121,016
Incidental Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Beam Guide Rail
Chain-link Fence, Aluminum-coated, Bridge, 6'-0" High
Concrete Sidewalk, 4" Thick
9" x 14" Concrete Vertical Curb
Tangent Guide Rail Terminal
Beam Guide Rail Anchorage
Removal of Beam Guide Rail
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 8 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Mile
0.06
$64,500.00
$3,870
804000P
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
806006P
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
809003M
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
$26,370
Landscape Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Planting (Mainline) (Length of Project in Miles)
Topsoil Spreading, 4" Thick
Fertilizing and Seeding,Type A-3
Straw Mulching
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 2 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 9 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Miles
0.06
$44,260.00
$2,656
-
Miles
0.06
$28,970.00
$1,738
-
Miles
0.06
$64,375.00
$3,863
$8,256
General Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Field Office
Materials Field Laboratory
Erosion Control During Construction
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:20 AM
MC
7/27/23
Alternative 3
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 1 of 9
Project Subtotal
Other Major Project Items
4,278,786.49
$
Project Toal =
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Lighting, Traffic Stripes, Signs, and Delineators
Maintenance of Traffic
Training
Mobilization
Progress Schedule
Clearing Site
Construction Layout
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
220,000
490,000
890,000
Project Subtotal Range
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 5.0
5.0 & above
$
7,000
20,000
42,000
87,000
160,000
45,000
115,000
220,000
240,000
250,000
490,000
30,000
40,000
58,000
$
15,000
30,000
10% of Project Subtotal
$
0
6,000
8,000
15,000
Choice
3% of Project Subtotal
7% of Project Subtotal
1% of Project Subtotal
% of Project Subtotal
9% of Project Subtotal
45,000.00
$
42,000.00
$
6,000.00
$
313,933.99
$
Amount
104,644.66
$
244,170.88
$
34,881.55
$
3,488,155.41
$
Item
Project Subtotal =
$71,820
$212,159
$26,370
$8,256
Landscape
General Items
Alternative 3 - Two-Span Concrete - Engineer's Estimate - Summary
Work Type Subtotals
$10,797
$81,134
$3,077,619
Work Type
Earthwork
Pavement
Bridge
Drainage
Incidental Items
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 2 of 9
Contingencies & Escallation
ROW Cost
If there is no ROW cost on the project, indicate "No ROW" in the box.
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies for Construction Change Order
For State Funded Projects, Contingencies for Change Orders = 0
Utility Relocations by Companies/Owners
Summary
Known Utility Relocation Subtotl =
1,800,000.00
$
Construction Estimate for CD
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies
Utilities: Relocation by Companies
Total Estimate Without Utilities
4,583,436.09
$
930,437.53
$
188,337.44
$
1,800,000.00
$
7,502,211.06
$
5,702,211.06
$
Total Estimate Without Utilities
Known Utility Relocations
Amount
1,800,000.00
$
PSE&G, Verizon, Cablevision/Altice USA
20.3%
16.2%
12.2%
930,437.53
$
$25,000
$25,000 + 4% of amount in excess of $500,000
$205,000 + 3% of amount in excess of $5,000,000
$355,000 + 2% of amount in excess of $10,000,000
1.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 & above
Construction Engineering Amount
Contingencies =
188,337.44
$
$500,000
Ttl. Federal Participating Items in Millions of $
0 to 0.1
0.1 to 0.5
0.5 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 15.0
15.0 and above
Construction Change Order Contingency Amount
$6,000
5-20
Contingencies (C ) Percent
3%
2.5%
Average Construction Duration in Years
1
2
Project Cost (in millions)
Less than 1.0
3
2%
Over 20
NO ROW
% of Construction Cost
31.1%
Project Cost (Mil.)
0-5
Contingencies
x (1+C)
1.03
4,583,436.09
$
x 1 + [0.01(Y)]
1.04
Y = Number of years until
midpoint of construction
duration. If Y<2, no
escallation required.
Construction Cost for
CD Estimate
4,278,786.49
$
Project Total
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 3 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
202003P
AC
1
$10,797.00
$10,797
$10,797
Earthwork Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Stripping
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 4 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
610036M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610006M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610039M
SF
700
$3.00
$2,100
610009M
SF
700
$5.00
$3,500
401099M
TON
194
$192.00
$37,291
401042M
TON
73
$198.00
$14,421
302048P
SY
422
$28.00
$11,822
$81,134
Pavement Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Removal of Traffic Stripes
Traffic Stripes, 6"
Hot Mix Asphalt 25 M 64 Base Course
Traffic Markings
Hot Mix Asphalt 9.5 M 64 Surface Course
Dense-Graded Aggregate Base Course, 12" Thick
Removal of Traffic Markings
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: DF Date: 3/17/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 5 of 9
TYPE:
CIP Concrete
LENGTH
137
x WIDTH
14
= AREA
1,918
SF
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
East Landing
Stair Landing Concrete
CY
300
$1,520.00
$456,000
Landing Reinforcement
LB
2,926
$4.50
$13,167
Elevator Foundation Concrete
CY
15
$1,520.00
$22,519
Foundation Reinforcement
LB
2,593
$4.50
$11,667
14 " Driven Piles
LF
180
$300.00
$54,000
Stainless Steel Frame at Elevator & Stairs
LB
23,061
$12.00
$276,727
Stair tower Roofing
LB
2,040
$4.00
$8,162
Glazing
SF
2,240
$120.00
$268,800
Elevator
LS
1
$400,000.00
$400,000
Steel for stairs
LB
6,431
$4.00
$25,725
Precast Concrete steps
EA
44
$90.00
$3,960
Excavation
CY
203
$250.00
$50,646
Backfill
CY
174
$250.00
$43,424
Main Span
Structural Steel
LB
0
$4.00
$0
Concrete Deck
CY
35
$1,520.00
$52,626
Deck Reinforcement
LB
5,581
$4.50
$25,113
Concrete Column
CY
13
$1,520.00
$19,877
Column Reinforcement
LB
4,577
$4.50
$20,596
CIDH Pile Excavation
LF
60
$1,800.00
$108,000
CIDH Pile Concrete
CY
70
$600.00
$41,846
CIDH Pile Reinforcement
LB
20,923
$4.50
$94,154
Miscellaneous
Steel Bridge Roof
LB
0
$7.00
$0
Glazing for steel bridge
SF
0
$120.00
$0
Architectural Bridge Railing
LF
304
$500.00
$152,070
Handrailing (stairs)
LF
133
$50.00
$6,660
Bearings
EA
4
$3,287.00
$13,148
Expansion Joints
LF
29
$731.00
$20,834
Functional Lighting
LS
1
$30,000.00
$30,000
Archtiectural Lighting
LS
1
$30,000.00
$30,000
HVAC for machine room
LS
1
$20,000.00
$20,000
Electrical
LS
1
$10,000.00
$10,000
$0
SUBTOTAL
$2,279,718
SQUARE FOOT COST (TOTAL)
$1,189
Total Estimated Cost
$2,279,718
Estimated $/SF
$1,188.59
Contingency:
35%
$797,901
Total with Contingency
35%
$3,077,619
$1,604.60
Bridge Work Items
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
JPL
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 6 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
602012M
UNIT
4
$7,330.00
$29,320
601122P
LF
140
$175.00
$24,500
602057M
UNIT
3
$6,000.00
$18,000
$71,820
Drainage Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Inlet, Type B
15" Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Manhole, 5' Diameter
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 7 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
609003M
LF
700
$26.00
$18,200
509030P
LF
700
$56.88
$39,816
606012P
SY
400
$60.00
$24,000
607012P
LF
300
$285.00
$85,500
611312M
UNIT
1
$38,643.00
$38,643
609027M
UNIT
1
$2,500.00
$2,500
609039M
UNIT
1
$1,000.00
$1,000
609075M
LF
500
$5.00
$2,500
$212,159
Incidental Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Beam Guide Rail
Chain-link Fence, Aluminum-coated, Bridge, 6'-0" High
Concrete Sidewalk, 4" Thick
24"x41" Concrete Barrier Curb
Crash Cushion, Compressive Barrier, Type 3, Width Narrow
Tangent Guide Rail Terminal
Beam Guide Rail Anchorage
Removal of Beam Guide Rail
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 8 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Mile
0.06
$64,500.00
$3,870
804000P
SY
1,500
$5.00
$7,500
806006P
SY
1,500
$5.00
$7,500
809003M
SY
1,500
$5.00
$7,500
$26,370
Landscape Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Planting (Mainline) (Length of Project in Miles)
Topsoil Spreading, 4" Thick
Fertilizing and Seeding, Type A3-
Straw Mulching
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 3 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 9 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Miles
0.06
$44,260.00
$2,656
-
Miles
0.06
$28,970.00
$1,738
-
Miles
0.06
$64,375.00
$3,863
$8,256
General Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Field Office
Materials Field Laboratory
Erosion Control During Construction
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:05 AM
MC
3/27/23
Alternative 4
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 1 of 9
Project Subtotal
Other Major Project Items
3,093,714.01
$
Project Toal =
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Lighting, Traffic Stripes, Signs, and Delineators
Maintenance of Traffic
Training
Mobilization
Progress Schedule
Clearing Site
Construction Layout
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
30.0 to 40.0
40.0 & above
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 2.0
2.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 20.0
20.0 to 30.0
220,000
490,000
890,000
Project Subtotal Range
Project Cost (Mil.)
Less than 5.0
5.0 & above
$
7,000
20,000
42,000
87,000
160,000
45,000
115,000
220,000
240,000
250,000
490,000
30,000
40,000
58,000
$
15,000
30,000
10% of Project Subtotal
$
0
6,000
8,000
15,000
Choice
3% of Project Subtotal
7% of Project Subtotal
1% of Project Subtotal
% of Project Subtotal
9% of Project Subtotal
45,000.00
$
42,000.00
$
6,000.00
$
225,053.55
$
Amount
75,017.85
$
175,041.65
$
25,005.95
$
2,500,595.01
$
Item
Project Subtotal =
$64,490
$121,016
$26,370
$8,256
Landscape
General Items
Alternative 4 - Simple Thru-Girder - Engineer's Estimate - Summary
Work Type Subtotals
$10,797
$47,695
$2,221,971
Work Type
Earthwork
Pavement
Bridge
Drainage
Incidental Items
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 2 of 9
Contingencies & Escallation
ROW Cost
If there is no ROW cost on the project, indicate "No ROW" in the box.
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies for Construction Change Order
For State Funded Projects, Contingencies for Change Orders = 0
Utility Relocations by Companies/Owners
Summary
Construction Estimate for CD
Construction Engineering (CE)
Contingencies
Utilities: Relocation by Companies
Total Estimate With Utilities
3,313,986.44
$
672,739.25
$
137,559.46
$
1,800,000.00
$
5,924,285.15
$
4,124,285.15
$
Total Estimate Without Utilities
Known Utility Relocation Subtotl =
1,800,000.00
$
Known Utility Relocations
Amount
1,800,000.00
$
PSE&G, Verizon, Cablevision/Altice USA
20.3%
16.2%
12.2%
672,739.25
$
$25,000
$25,000 + 4% of amount in excess of $500,000
$205,000 + 3% of amount in excess of $5,000,000
$355,000 + 2% of amount in excess of $10,000,000
1.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 & above
Construction Engineering Amount
Contingencies =
137,559.46
$
$500,000
Ttl. Federal Participating Items in Millions of $
0 to 0.1
0.1 to 0.5
0.5 to 5.0
5.0 to 10.0
10.0 to 15.0
15.0 and above
Construction Change Order Contingency Amount
$6,000
5-20
Contingencies (C ) Percent
3%
2.5%
Average Construction Duration in Years
1
2
Project Cost (in millions)
Less than 1.0
3
2%
Over 20
NO ROW
% of Construction Cost
31.1%
Project Cost (Mil.)
0-5
Contingencies
x (1+C)
1.03
3,313,986.44
$
x 1 + [0.01(Y)]
1.04
Y = Number of years until
midpoint of construction
duration. If Y<2, no
escallation required.
Construction Cost for
CD Estimate
3,093,714.01
$
Project Total
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 3 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
202003P
AC
1.0
$10,797.00
$10,797
$10,797
Earthwork Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Stripping
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 4 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
610036M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610006M
LF
3,000
$2.00
$6,000
610039M
SF
700
$3.00
$2,100
610009M
SF
700
$5.00
$3,500
401099M
TON
92
$192.00
$17,664
401042M
TON
35
$198.00
$6,831
302048P
SY
200
$28.00
$5,600
$47,695
Pavement Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Removal of Traffic Stripes
Traffic Stripes, 6"
Removal of Traffic Markings
Traffic Markings
Hot Mix Asphalt 25 M 64 Base Course
Hot Mix Asphalt 9.5 M 64 Surface Course
Dense-Graded Aggregate Base Course, 12" Thick
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: DG Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 5 of 9
TYPE:
Steel Through Girder
LENGTH
137
x WIDTH
12.25
= AREA
1,678
SF
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
East Landing
Stair Landing Concrete
CY
300
$1,520.00
$456,000
Landing Reinforcement
LB
3,617
$4.50
$16,278
Elevator Foundation Concrete
CY
32
$1,520.00
$48,790
Foundation Reinforcement
LB
5,617
$4.50
$25,278
14 " Driven Piles
LF
300
$300.00
$90,000
Stainless Steel Frame at Elevator & Stairs
LB
0
$12.00
$0
Stair tower Roofing
LB
0
$4.00
$0
Glazing
SF
0
$120.00
$0
Elevator
LS
1
$400,000.00
$400,000
Steel for stairs
LB
6,431
$4.00
$25,725
Precast Concrete steps
EA
44
$90.00
$3,960
Excavation
CY
325
$250.00
$81,340
Backfill
CY
263
$250.00
$65,692
Main Span
Structural Steel
LB
38,292
$4.00
$153,168
Concrete Deck
CY
47
$1,520.00
$71,341
Deck Reinforcement
LB
10,560
$4.50
$47,522
Concrete Column
CY
0
$1,520.00
$0
Column Reinforcement
LB
0
$4.50
$0
CIDH Pile Excavation
LF
0
$4,000.00
$0
CIDH Pile Concrete
CY
0
$600.00
$0
CIDH Pile Reinforcement
LB
0
$4.50
$0
Miscellaneous
Steel Bridge Roof
LB
0
$7.00
$0
Glazing for steel bridge
SF
0
$120.00
$0
Architectural Bridge Railing
LF
0
$500.00
$0
Handrailing (stairs)
LF
120
$50.00
$6,000
Bearings
EA
4
$3,287.00
$13,148
Expansion Joints
LF
29
$731.00
$20,834
Functional Lighting
LS
1
$30,000.00
$30,000
Archtiectural Lighting
LS
0
$30,000.00
$0
HVAC for machine room
LS
1
$20,000.00
$20,000
Electrical
LS
1
$10,000.00
$10,000
LF
274
$222.00
$60,828
$1,645,904
$981
Total Estimated Cost
$1,645,904
Estimated $/SF
$980.73
Contingency:
35%
$576,066
Total with Contingency:
35%
$2,221,971
$1,323.98
Bridge Work Items
SUBTOTAL
SQUARE FOOT COST (TOTAL)
Bridge Fencing
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
JPL
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 6 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
602012M
UNIT
3
$7,330.00
$21,990
601122P
LF
140
$175.00
$24,500
602057M
UNIT
3
$6,000.00
$18,000
$64,490
Drainage Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Inlet, Type B
15" Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Manhole, 5' Diameter
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 7 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
609003M
LF
700
$26.00
$18,200
509030P
LF
700
$56.88
$39,816
606012P
SY
400
$60.00
$24,000
607034P
LF
600
$55.00
$33,000
609027M
UNIT
1
$2,500.00
$2,500
609039M
UNIT
1
$1,000.00
$1,000
609075M
LF
500
$5.00
$2,500
$121,016
Incidental Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Beam Guide Rail
Chain-link Fence, Aluminum-coated, Bridge, 6'-0" High
Concrete Sidewalk, 4" Thick
9" x 14" Concrete Vertical Curb
Tangent Guide Rail Terminal
Beam Guide Rail Anchorage
Removal of Beam Guide Rail
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 8 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Mile
0.06
$64,500.00
$3,870
804000P
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
806006P
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
809003M
SY
1,500.00
$5.00
$7,500
$26,370
Landscape Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Planting (Mainline) (Length of Project in Miles)
Topsoil Spreading, 4" Thick
Fertilizing and Seeding,Type A-3
Straw Mulching
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Project: Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge
Item: Alt. 4 Construction Cost Estimate
Job No: 3010.0100471.000
Designer: JPL Date: 3/14/23
Checker: _______ Date: ________
Sheet: 9 of 9
ITEM
CONTRACT ITEMS
UNIT
QUANTITY
PRICE
AMOUNT
-
Miles
0.06
$44,260.00
$2,656
-
Miles
0.06
$28,970.00
$1,738
-
Miles
0.06
$64,375.00
$3,863
$8,256
General Work Items
SUBTOTAL
Field Office
Materials Field Laboratory
Erosion Control During Construction
TY Lin International
Revised:
Printed: 7/31/2023, 11:25 AM
MC
7/27/23
Appendix S
Alternatives Matrix
556 |
360 |
564 |
Alternatives Matrix
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
8/18/2023
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Description of Alternative
At-grade corssing of Route 440 at Goldsborough Drive on the southerly approach.
Single span steel truss, covered, with stairs and an elevator.
Two span concrete bridge, uncovered, with stairs and an elevator.
Single span simple bridge, uncovered, with stairs and an elevator.
Major Risks
(Threats or Opportunities)
- Potential for vehicle/pedestrian accidents remains relatively high with at-grade crossing.
- Reduced LOS at Rt. 440/Goldsborough Dr.
- Handling and disposal of regulated material may be required.
- Opportunity to greatly reduce vehicle/pedestrian accidents with a grade-seperated crossing.
- Relocation of overhead utilities could be costly
- Exact alignment of existing oil/gas/petroleum utilities unknown, could affect east pier location.
- Handling and disposal of regulated material may be required.
Access Impacts and Waivers
Complete Streets Policy Compliance
Will provide a crosswalk, with protected pedestrian signal phase, across Route 440 for pedestrian and
bicyclists where currently none exists, however conflict with motor vehicles will still exist with this
alternative
Constructability
- Most construction will occur with limited conflicts to motor vehicles.
- Lane shifts of Rt. 440 SB required for demo of overhead sign structure, drainage, traffic signal, and
crosswalk improvements.
- Minimal on-site work and disturbance.
- Truss elements can be shipped in and erected overnight.
- Rt. 440 NB lane shift required for east landing construction.
'- Closure of Rt. 440 NB on-ramp at Port Terminal Blvd. required.
- Multiple overnight lane closures of Route 440 are required to install and remove temporary
falsework over traffic lanes during construction.
- Temporary lane shifts required for construction of pier column in median.
- Rt. 440 NB lane shift required for east landing construction.
'- Closure of Rt. 440 NB on-ramp at Port Terminal Blvd. required.
- Minimal on-site work and disturbance.
- Superstructure units can be shipped in and erected overnight.
- Overhead work and lane closures possible.
- Rt. 440 NB lane shift required for east landing construction.
'- Closure of Rt. 440 NB on-ramp at Port Terminal Blvd. required.
Maintenance
- Sidewalk clearing and landscape maintenance.
- Ongoing maintenance of SWM treatment devices.
- Periodic repainting, concrete repairs, and bearing replacement.
- Elevator maintenance.
- Sidewalk clearing and landscape maintenance.
- Periodic concrete repairs, bearing replacement.
- Snow removal required.
- Elevator maintenance.
- Sidewalk clearing and landscape maintenance.
- Periodic repainting, concrete repairs, and bearing replacement.
- Snow removal required.
- Elevator maintenance.
- Sidewalk clearing and landscape maintenance.
Design Exceptions
Anticipated Environmental Document
Community Impacts (Environmental
Justice)
Although a protected crosswalk will be constructed, community members may still feel unsafe with
an at-grade crossing.
Design Criteria
- Urban Principal Arterial
- Design Speed = 45 mph
- 51,521 ADT (2022)
Safety Improvement
- At-grade crosswalk added across Rt. 440 at Goldsborough Dr.
- Sidewalk added along Route 440 SB from Goldsborough Dr. to Prospect Ave.
- MASH compliant guide rail added to meet standards.
Structures
N/A
- Single span truss with stairs and elevator.
- Covered superstructure with roof and chain link fencing.
- Reinforced concrete footing supported on piles.
- Two span concrete bridge with stairs and elevator.
- Uncovered with chain link fencing above roadway.
- Reinforced concrete pier column and cap, founded on piles.
- Single span steel through girder bridge with stairs and elevator.
- Uncovered superstructure with curved top chain link fencing on structure above roadway.
- Reinforced concrete footing supported on piles.
Minimum Vertical Clearance to Rt. 440
N/A
22'-10"
22'-8"
22'-10"
Typical Sections
- Proposed pavement repair strips, curb, sidewalk, and guiderail added.
- Improvements will meet NJDOT typical section design standards.
- 12'-0" wide horizontal opening.
- 14'-0" tall (and varies) vertical opening.
- 12'-0" wide horizontal opening.
- 7'-0" tall (min.) and varies vertical opening.
- 12'-0" wide horizontal opening.
- 6'-0" (min.) to 10'-0" (max.) vertical opening.
Additional Traffic Analysis (if needed)
Future traffic analysis for planned MOTBY developments may be needed to understand full impact to
intersection LOS.
Rt. 440 & Goldsborough Drive Intersection
Existing and Design Year Level of Service
Analysis, Year of Level of Service F if
before the Design Year
Existing (2022): AM (B) PM (D)
Design Year (2045): AM (F); PM (F)
Estimated Construction Cost
Construction Cost = $ 736,000
Utility Relocation Cost = $ 65,000
Construction Cost = $ 8.282 M
Utility Relocation Cost = $ 1.800 M
Construction Cost = $ 5.702 M
Utility Relocation Cost = $ 1.800 M
Construction Cost = $ 4.124 M
Utility Relocation Cost = $ 1.800 M
Limits of Disturbance
- Net increase in Impervious Surface < 0.25 ac
- Net increase in Regulated MVS > 0.25 ac
- Disturbance < 1 ac
- Major Development, SWM compliance required.
Environmental Constraints and Mitigation
Costs
Estimate ROW (# of acquisitions, total
acres)
~0.1 acre on west side of Rt. 440 at intersection with Goldsborough Drive for sidewalk construction
Design Standards (NJDOT Standard
Specifications, AASTHO)
- NJDOT Roadway Design Manual
- MUTCD for traffic signal and signage modifications.
- NJDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction
ROW Impacts (areas, easements, land use
& impacts, lot and block)
- Block 407: Lots 1 and 2 (NJ Transit) permanent acquisition for sidewalks.
- Block 407 Lots 1 and 2 (NJ Transit) temporary construction easement.
Signal Warrants for all Proposed Signals
- N/A. Traffic signal already at intersection.
Traffic Management Alternatives
Project can be constructed utilizing Route 44 SB shoulder closure and lane shift to maintain exit to
Prospect Avenue.
Project can be constructed in one main stage with traffic shifted to the west to construct utility
relocations and east landing with elevator and stairs. Detour of the Port Terminal Blvd. right turns
onto Route 440 NB will be required.
Route 440 will require a one night closure on a weekend, with detour, to erect the pre-fabricated
bridge.
Project can be constructed in two main stages. In Stage 1, traffic will be shifted to the west to
construct the utility relocations and the east landing with stairs and elevator. Detour of the Port
Terminal Blvd. right turns onto Route 440 NB will be required. In Stage 2, traffic will be shifted to the
east to construct the pier in the median along with the median barrier.
Two overnight closures of Route 440, with detour, are required to construct and deconstruct the
falsework for the bridge.
PSE&G Electric will be reocated underground under Route 440 NB. The Verizon telephone and
Cablevision cable utilities will be lowered on the poles to span under the proposed bridge. Estimated
utility relocation cost is $1,800,000.
Utility Relocation and Associated Costs
Aerial and/or underground utility relocations may be required for the traffic signal improvements. It is
estimated that utility relocation construction cost will be $65,000.
Existing (2022): AM (B) PM (D)
Design Year (2045): AM (C); PM (D)
No traffic signal improvements proposed
- Opportunity to greatly reduce vehicle/pedestrian accidents with a grade-seperated crossing.
- Opportunity for a signature structure to serve as a gateway into the heart of the business area along Route 440.
- Relocation of overhead utilities could be costly
- Exact alignment of existing oil/gas/petroleum utilities unknown, could affect east pier location.
-There are ROW impacts to NJ Transit property due to proposed bridge tying into the existing pier for the NJ Transit Hudson Bergen Light Rail Station Pedestrian Bridge and for the placement of cranes to erect the proposed pedestrian bridge. Any permanent/temporary easements and/or Right-of-Entry
agreements with NJ Transit and Conrail shall be coordinated during Preliminary Engineering.
- NJDOT Roadway Design Manual
- NJDOT Design Manual for Bridge and Structures
- NJDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction
There are ROW impacts to NJ Transit property due to proposed bridge tying into the existing pier for the NJ Transit Hudson Bergen Light Rail Station Pedestrian Bridge and for the placement of cranes to erect the proposed pedestrian bridge. Any permanent/temporary easements and/or Right-of-Entry
agreements with NJ Transit and Conrail shall be coordinated during Preliminary Engineering.
PSE&G Electric will be reocated underground under Route 440 NB. The Verizon telephone and Cablevision cable utilities will be lowered on the poles to span under the proposed bridge. Estimated utility relocation cost is $1,800,000.
-
Will provide protected and conflict free crossing of Route 440 for pedestrian and bicyclists where currently none exists.
Certified Categorical Exclusion Document (CCED)
- Net increase in Impervious Surface < 0.25 ac
- Net increase in Regulated MVS < 0.25 ac
- Disturbance < 1 ac
- Minor Development, SWM compliance not required.
- Project located in area of known environmental contamination.
- Costs associated with handling and disposal of regulated materials may be required for excavation activities.
-
None Anticipated
- Grade seperated crossing of Route 440 will benefit communities and businesses east and west of Route 440.
- Elevator downtimes may violate ADA requirements.
- Urban Principal Arterial
- Design Speed = 45 mph
- 51,521 ADT (2022)
- 17'-0" minimum vertical clearance required by NJDOT DMBS Table 2.3.3.2.
- Grade seperated crossing for pedestrians/bicyclists.
- Fencing on bridge over roadway to prevent debris and pedestrians falling onto Route 440.
- Adding fencing to Route 440 median barrier could discourage crossings and promote use of bridge.
- 6'-0" concrete sidewalk added along Rt. 440 NB between Port Terminal Blvd. and Goldsborough Dr.
N/A
Appendix T
Risk Register
558 |
360 |
566 |
Project Manager:
Suzanne Mack (City of Bayonne)
Municipality(ies):
Bayonne
PROJECT RISK REGISTER
Designer:
TYLin
County(ies):
Hudson
Project Job No.:
#CY22-065
Initial Register Date:
3/28/2023
NJDOT UPC #:
N/A
Last Register Update:
7/26/2023
Risk Rank
Unique
ID #
Risk Statement
Initial Risk
Owner
Risk May
Occur In
Risk
Probability
Schedule
Cost
Schedule
Score
Cost
Score
Final
Score
Risk Response
Strategy
Risk Response Action Plan
Final Risk Owner
Action Plan
Status
Risk Last
Updated
5
1
As a result of requiring an overnight temporary closure of Rt. 440 during
bridge or falsework erection, alternatives 2, 3, and 4 may not have a suitable
detour for Rt. 440 SB traffic, leading to traffic delays and impacts to local
streets.
Traffic
Operations
Construction
4 - High
1 - Very Low
4 - Moderate
4
16
20
Mitigate Threat
- Work to reduce the length and timing of any temporary closure of Rt. 440
in order to minimize negative effects.
- Develop a draft detour plan during CD and coordinate closely with the City
of Bayonne and the NJDOT to improve/refine it.
- Present detour plan to public at PIC to solicit their input.
City of Bayonne
Plan To Be
Developed
3/28/2023
1
2
As a result of the proposed pedestrian bridge crossing through existing
overhead electrical, cable, and telephone utilities, relocation of the utilities
may be required, leading to significant increases to the cost and schedule of
the project.
Utilities
Construction
5 - Very High
4 - Moderate
10 - Very High
20
50
70
Mitigate Threat
- Coordinate with overhead utility companies early in the CD phase to
develop feasible alternatives.
- Develop structural alternatives that allow for the inclusion of underground
utility relocation.
- Acquire underground utility relocation cost estimate and timelines early in
CD to help better understand the risk.
- Clearly identify risk in CD Report and account for continued, detailed
coordination in PE Scope Statement.
Contractor,
Designer, City of
Bayonne
Active Plan
Implementation
3/28/2023
7
3
As a result of utilizing the existing pier on the west landing, modifications or
strengthening improvements may need to be made in order to support the
proposed structure, leading to an increase in the scope of work in
subsequent phases of the project.
Structural
Preliminary
Engineering
2 - Low
4 - Moderate
4 - Moderate
8
8
16
Mitigate Threat
- In the CD Report, clearly identify the risk and the requirement for further
study in subsequent phases of the project. Include available as-built plans
related to the structure.
- In the PE phase, perform a structural analysis of the existing pier to
determine the maximum load it could support from a proposed pedestrian
bridge and include a recommendation as to it's potential of being used in
the Structural Design Recommendation Summary.
Designer
Plan Not
Implemented
3/28/2023
4
4
As a result of limited ROW and the proposed construction areas, contractor
access to the different areas of the project may be limited, leading to
potential construction easements, potential for lane shifts, increased
construction costs, and/or increased construction duration.
Construction
Preliminary
Engineering
3 - Moderate
4 - Moderate
4 - Moderate
12
12
24
Mitigate Threat
- During CD, develop a constructability plan to determine potential
contractor access points and potential construction easements.
- Hold CRAW in the CD phase to get input from DOT Construction SMEs.
Designer
Active Plan
Implementation
3/28/2023
2
5
As a result of limited ROW width at the east landing, existing underground
utilities, and the plan for the proposed pier footing, stairs, elevator, and
potential underground utilities, the east landing area could become very
congested, leading to detailed coordination and design earlier in the project
process than is usual.
Construction
Preliminary
Engineering
5 - Very High
4 - Moderate
4 - Moderate
20
20
40
Mitigate Threat
- In CD Phase, gather as much information as possible as to the location of
existing underground utilities.
- In CD Phase, coordinate with utilities companies to determine the
potential footprint of underground utility relocation of existing aerial
utilities.
- Provide structural alternatives which have a minimum footprint on the
east side in order to allow for clearance from existing underground utilities
and the addition of proposed underground utilities.
Designer
Active Plan
Implementation
3/28/2023
9
6
As a result of needing to shift Rt. 440 NB traffic slightly to the west to
facilitate construction work at the east landing, it may be advantageous to
investiage removing the existing median barrier in order to maximize the Rt.
440 NB lane shift, which would lead to a maximization of the work zone for
the contractor and potentially a shorter construction duration.
Geometric
Design
Preliminary
Engineering
3 - Moderate
1 - Very Low
1 - Very Low
3
3
6
Exploit
Opportunity
In the PE phase, study different lane shift options of Rt. 440 NB including
removing the existing median barrier for feasibility and to determine if it
has potential to benefit the project.
Designer
Plan Not
Implemented
7/26/2023
3
7
As a result of uncertanties relating to the final ownership, jurisdiction, and
maintenance of the proposed bridge, a ramp system may be preferred over
an elevator, which would lead to set backs in the design process due to
having to incorporate a ramp system into the project.
Maintenance
Preliminary
Engineering
3 - Moderate
4 - Moderate
7 - High
12
21
33
Mitigate Threat
Conduct coordination between the City of Bayonne, NJ Transit, and the
NJDOT to determine who will ultimately own and maintain the proposed
bridge over Rt. 440 and east landing.
City of Bayonne/NJ
Tranist/NJDOT
Active Plan
Implementation
7/26/2023
8
8
As a result of the PPA including a elevator, delays stemming from DCA's
review and approval process may occur, which would lead to delays in the
project shcedule.
Community
Relations
Preliminary
Engineering
3 - Moderate
2 - Low
2 - Low
6
6
12
Mitigate Threat
Initiate required coordination with the DCA early in the PE phase in order to
avoid delays to the project schedule.
Designer
Active Plan
Implementation
7/26/2023
10
9
As a result of the existing un-used sign structure 0913-204 being located
immediately south of the proposed bridge, the NJDOT may plan to utilize
this sign structure in the future, which would lead to the sign being obscured
by the pedestrian bridge.
Traffic
Operations
Preliminary
Engineering
1 - Very Low
1 - Very Low
4 - Moderate
1
4
5
Accept Threat
There is no indication that this sign structure has been utilized since
approximately 2010 when it was in use to inform motorists of turning
movements from Rt. 440 SB onto Port Terminal Rd. EB.
NJDOT
Plan
Implemented
7/26/2023
5
10
As a result of requiring police support for MPT opeations, the use of City of
Bayonne Police Department officers may occur, which would lead to a
required agreement between the City of Bayonne Police Department and
the New Jersey State Police.
Project
Management
Construction
10 - Very High
1 - Very Low
1 - Very Low
10
10
20
Mitigate Threat
Coordinate between the City of Bayonne Police Department and the New
Jersey State Police to reach an agreement on officers from which agency
will provide support during MPT operations during construction.
City of Bayonne
Plan Not
Implemented
7/26/2023
RISK MANAGEMENT
Project Name:
Risk Response Strategy & Response Planning
Risk Rank & ID
Risk Statement & Category
Risk Category
Risk Impact
Risk Analysis Matrix
Bayonne Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440
Appendix U
Quantitative Risk Analysis Report
(Not Applicable to this Project)
560 |
360 |
568 |
Appendix V
Utility Risk Assessment Plan
561 |
360 |
569 |
Appendix W
Complete Streets Checklist
563 |
360 |
571 |
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 1 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Background
The New Jersey Department of Transportation’s Complete Streets Policy promotes a
“comprehensive, integrated, connected multi-modal network by providing connections to
bicycling and walking trip generators such as employment, education, residential,
recreational and public facilities, as well as retail and transit centers.” The policy calls for
the establishment of a checklist to address pedestrian, bicyclist and transit accommodations
“with the presumption that they shall be included in each project unless supporting
documentation against inclusion is provided and found to be justifiable.”
Complete Streets Checklist
The following checklist is an accompaniment to NJDOT’s Complete Streets Policy and has
been developed to assist Project Managers and designers develop proposed alternatives in
adherence to the policy. Being in compliance with the policy means that Project Managers
and designers plan for, design, and construct all transportation projects to provide
appropriate accommodation for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users on New Jersey’s
roadways, in addition to those provided for motorists. It includes people of all ages and
abilities. The checklist applies to all NJDOT projects that undergo the Capital Project
Delivery (CPD) Process and is intended for use on projects during the earliest stages of the
Concept Development or Preliminary Engineering Phase so that any pedestrian or bicycle
considerations are included in the project budget. The Project Manager is responsible for
completing the checklist and must work with the Designer to ensure that the checklist has
been completed prior to advancement of a project to Final Design.
Using the Complete Streets Checklist
The Complete Streets Checklist is a tool to be used by Project Managers and designers
throughout Concept Development and Preliminary Engineering to ensure that all
developed alternatives reflect compliance with the Policy. When completing the checklist, a
brief description is required for each “Item to be Addressed” as a means to document that
the item has been considered and can include supporting documentation.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 2 of 11
Released: 10/2011
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST
Instructions:
For each box checked, please provide a brief description for how the item is addressed, not
addressed or not applicable and include documentation to support your answer.
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Existing Bicycle,
Pedestrian and
Transit
Accommodations
Are there accommodations for
bicyclists, pedestrians (including
ADA compliance) and transit
users included on or crossing the
current facility?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
Sidewalks, public seating, bike
racks, and transit shelters
Nearest crossing of
Route 440 is approx. ¼
mile south at the
Lefante Way/E. 32nd
Street intersection with
Route 440. There is
sidewalk between
Lefante Way and Port
Terminal Blvd along
both Route 440 NB and
Route 440 SB. There is
also a 4’-6” wide
asphalt walkway
between Port Terminal
Blvd and Goldsborough
Drive along Route 440
NB. There is no
sidewalk present along
Route 440 SB between
Prospect Avenue and
Goldsborough Drive.
Existing Bicycle and
Pedestrian
Operations
Has the existing bicycle and
pedestrian suitability or level of
service on the current
transportation facility been
identified?
No bicycle or
pedestrian level of
service has been
identified.
Have the bicycle and pedestrian
conditions within the study area,
including pedestrian and/or
bicyclist treatments, volumes,
important connections and
lighting been identified?
The study area needs
pedestrian and bicycle
access to accommodate
the anticipated future
need to connect the 34th
Street NJ Transit
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station with the
redeveloped lots at the
Peninsula at Bayonne
Harbor.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 3 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Do bicyclists/pedestrians
regularly use the transportation
facility for commuting or
recreation?
Bicyclists/pedestrians
do not regularly cross
Route 440 at the site of
the proposed
Pedestrian Bridge, just
south of Goldsborough
Drive. However,
pedestrians were
observed crossing
Route 440 in this
vicinity and hopping
over the median barrier.
There is an anticipated
increased need for
pedestrians to cross
Route 440 to access the
34th Street NJ Transit
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Are there physical or perceived
impediments to bicyclist or
pedestrian use of the
transportation facility?
There is no existing safe
way/accommodation to
cross Route 440 in the
vicinity of the proposed
pedestrian bridge
location as there isn’t a
pedestrian crossing at
the Route
440/Goldsborough
Drive intersection.
Impediments include
the roadway median
barrier, heavy traffic on
Rt. 440 and a wide
roadway (up to 6 lanes
to cross).
Is there a higher than normal
incidence of bicyclist/pedestrian
crashes within the study area?
125 crash incidences
were reported between
January 2019 and
September 2022 with
only one of them
involving a pedestrian.
However, years prior to
2019 there were some
fatal accidents
involving pedestrians
on Rt. 440 in the vicinity
of the project.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 4 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Have the existing volumes of
pedestrian and/or bicyclist
crossing activity at intersections
including midblock and nighttime
crossing been collected/provided?
Volumes have been
collected at the
intersection of Rt. 440
and E 32nd
Street/Lefante Way and
at the intersection of Rt.
440 and Goldsborough
Drive with the
exception for midblock
crossing and nighttime
crossing.
Existing Transit
Operations
Are there existing transit facilities
within the study area, including
bus and train stops/stations?
The study area is
adjacent to the NJ
Transit 34th Street
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Royal Caribbean Cruise
Line runs a shuttle
service from the light
rail station to their dock
at the end of the
redeveloped lots at the
Peninsula at Bayonne
Harbor.
Is the transportation facility on a
transit route?
The proposed
pedestrian bridge will
connect to the NJ
Transit 34th Street
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Is the transportation facility
within two miles of “park and
ride” or “kiss and go” lots?
There is a park and ride
lot adjacent to the NJ
Transit 34th Street
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Are there existing or proposed
bicycle racks, shelters, or parking
available at these lots or transit
stations? Are there bike racks on
buses that travel along the
facility?
There are bicycles racks
and parking available
adjacent to the NJ
Transit 34th Street
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Existing Motor
Vehicle Operations
Are there existing concerns within
the study area, regarding motor
vehicle safety, traffic
volumes/congestion or access?
There are not known
concerns regarding
motor vehicle safety.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 5 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Existing
Truck/Freight
Operations
Are there existing concerns within
the study area, regarding
truck/freight safety, volumes, or
access?
There are not known
concerns regarding
truck/freight safety.
Existing Access and
Mobility
Are there any existing access or
mobility considerations, including
ADA compliance?
There is not any
existing ADA compliant
access from the
Peninsula at Bayonne
Harbor to the 34th Street
Hudson Bergen Light
Rail Station.
Are there any schools, hospitals,
senior care facilities, educational
buildings, community centers,
residences or businesses of
persons with disabilities within or
proximate to the study area?
1. Schools:
• Walter F Robinson
Community School
• Horace Mann
Elementary School
• Lincoln Community
School
2. Hospitals:
• Bayonne Medical
Center
• RWJ Barnabus Health
at Bayonne
Land Usage
Have you identified the
predominant land uses and
densities within the study area,
including any historic districts or
special zoning districts?
The study area is in an
urban landscape within
the City of Bayonne.
Is the transportation facility in a
high-density land use area that
has pedestrian/bicycle/motor
vehicle and transit traffic?
The transportation
facility is in a high-
density land use area.
The development of the
Peninsula at Bayonne
Harbor is expected to
increase the need for
pedestrians/bicylists to
cross Route 440 to
access the NJ Transit
34th Street Hudson
Bergen Light Rail
Station.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 6 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Major Sites
Have you identified the major
sites, destinations, and trip
generators within or proximate to
the study area, including
prominent landmarks,
employment centers, recreation,
commercial, cultural and civic
institutions, and public spaces?
Major sites include 34th
Street Hudson Bergen
Light Rail Station, Lidl
Market, Costco
Wholesale, CVS
pharmacy among
others.
Existing Streetscape
Are there existing street trees,
planters, buffer strips, or other
environmental enhancements
such as drainage swales within
the study area?
Existing roadside
streetscape is located
along Goldsborough
Drive.
Existing Plans
Are there any comprehensive
planning documents that address
bicyclist, pedestrian or transit user
conditions within or proximate to
the study area?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
• SRTS Travel Plans
• Municipal or County Master or
Redevelopment Plan
• Local, County and Statewide
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans
• Sidewalk Inventories
• MPO Transportation Plan
• NJDOT Designated Transit
Village
The 34th Street
Redevelopment Plan is
expected to be reopened
in January 2024.
The Peninsula at
Bayonne Harbor BLRA
Redevelopment Plan in
September 2008
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 7 of 11
Released: 10/2011
PROJECT MANAGER SIGN-OFF
Statement of Compliance
YES
NO
If NO, Please
Describe Why (refer
to Exemptions
Clause)
The Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA)
accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians as set forth in
the New Jersey Department of Transportation’s
Complete Streets Policy.
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 8 of 11
Released: 10/2011
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING CHECKLIST
Instructions:
For each box checked, please provide a brief description for how the item is addressed, not
addressed or not applicable and include documentation to support your answer.
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Bicyclist,
Pedestrian, and
Transit
Accommodations
Does the proposed project design
include accommodations for
bicyclists?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
Bicycle facilities: bicycle path;
bicycle lane; bicycle route; bicycle
boulevard; wide outside lanes or
improved shoulders; bicycle
actuation at signals (loop detectors
and stencil or other means); signs,
signals and pavement markings
specifically related to bicycle
operation on roadways or shared-
use facilities; bicycle safe inlet
grates
Bicycle amenities: Call boxes (for
trail or bridge projects); drinking
fountains (also for trail projects);
secure long term bicycle parking
(e.g., for commuters and
residents); and secure short term
bicycle parking.
Does the proposed project design
address accommodations for
pedestrians?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
Pedestrian facilities: Sidewalks
(preferably on both sides of the
street); mid-block crosswalks;
striped crosswalks; geometric
modifications to reduce crossing
distances such as curb extensions
(bulb-outs); pedestrian-actuated
traffic signals such as High
Intensity Activated Crosswalk
Beacons, Rapid Rectangular
Flashing Beacons; dedicated
pedestrian phase; pedestrian
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 9 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
signal heads and pushbuttons;
pedestrian signs for crossing and
wayfinding, lead pedestrian
intervals; high visibility
crosswalks (e.g., ladder or zebra);
pedestrian-level lighting; in-road
warning lights; pedestrian safety
fencing; pedestrian detection
system; pedestrian
overpass/underpass; and median
safety islands for roadways with
(two or more traffic lanes in each
direction).
Pedestrian amenities: Shade trees;
public seating; drinking fountains
Have you coordinated with the
corresponding transit authority to
accommodate transit users in the
project design?
Transit facilities: Transit shelters,
bus turnouts
Transit amenities: public seating,
signage, maps, schedules, trash
and recycling receptacles
Bicyclist and
Pedestrian
Operations
Does the proposed design consider
the desired future bicyclist and
walking conditions within the
project area including safety,
volumes, comfort and convenience
of movement, important walking
and/or bicycling connections, and
the quality of the walking
environment and/or availability of
bicycle parking?
Transit Operations
Does the proposed design address
the desired/anticipated future
transit conditions within the
project area, including bus routes
and operations and transit station
access support transit usage and
users?
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 10 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Motor Vehicle
Operations
Does the proposed design address
the desired future motor vehicle
conditions within the project area,
including volumes, access,
important motor vehicle
connections, appropriateness of
motor vehicle traffic to the
particular street (e.g., local versus
through traffic) and the reduction
of the negative impacts of motor
vehicle traffic?
.Truck/Freight
Operations
Does the proposed design address
the desired future truck conditions
within the project area, including
truck routes, volumes, access,
mobility and the reduction of the
negative impacts of truck traffic?
Access and Mobility
Does the proposed design address
accommodations for those with
access or mobility challenges such
as the disabled, elderly, and
children, including ADA
compliance?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
Curb ramps, including detectable
warning surface; accessible signal
actuation; adequate sidewalk or
paved path (length & width or
linear feet); acceptable slope and
cross-slope (particularly for
driveway ramps over sidewalks,
over crossings and trails); and
adequate green signal crossing
time
Land Usage
Is the proposed design compatible
with the predominant land uses
and densities within the project
area, including any historic
districts or special zoning districts?
Major Sites
Can the proposed design support
the major sites, destinations, and
trip generators within or
proximate to the project area,
including prominent landmarks,
commercial, cultural and civic
institutions, and public spaces?
NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist
Page 11 of 11
Released: 10/2011
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
YES
NO
N/A
Required
Description
Streetscape
Does the proposed design include
landscaping, street trees, planters,
buffer strips, or other
environmental enhancements such
as drainage swales?
Design Standards or
Guidelines
Does the proposed design follow
all applicable design standards or
guidelines appropriate for bicycle
and/or pedestrian facilities?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
American Association of State
Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) - A Policy on
Geometric Design of Highway and
Streets, Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities, Guide for the
Planning, Design, and Operation of
Pedestrian Facilities; Public Right-of-
Way Accessibility Guide
(PROWAG); Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD);
Americans with Disabilities Act
Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG);
National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO)
- Urban Bikeway Design Guide; New
Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDOT) - Bicycle
Compatible Roadways & Bikeways
Planning and Design Guidelines,
Pedestrian Planning and Design
Guidelines.
PROJECT MANAGER SIGN-OFF
Statement of Compliance
YES
NO
If NO, Please
Describe Why (refer
to Exemptions Clause)
The Approved Project Plan (APP) accommodates
bicyclists and pedestrians as set forth in the New Jersey
Department of Transportation’s Complete Streets
Policy.
Appendix X
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
(Not Applicable to this Project)
575 |
360 |
583 |
Appendix Y
Systems Engineering Review Form
(Not Applicable to this Project)
576 |
360 |
584 |
Appendix Z
Preliminary Engineering Public
Involvement Action Plan
577 |
360 |
585 |
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER ROUTE 440
BETWEEN THE 34TH STREET HUDSON BERGEN LIGHT RAIL
STATION AND THE PENINSULA AT BAYONNE HARBOR
Prepared by: Prepared for:
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between
the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail
Station and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Page 2 of 5
Contents
1.
PROJECT PURPOSE .................................................................................................. 3
2.
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 3
3.
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ............................................... 3
4.
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ........................................... 4
4.1 PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTER: ................................................................................ 4
4.2 STAKEHOLDER MEETING: .......................................................................................... 4
5.
DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT ............................................................................................. 5
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between
the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail
Station and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Page 3 of 5
1. PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting pedestrians and
bicyclists from the east side of Route 440 just south of Goldsborough Drive to the west side of
Route 440 at the 34th Street HBLR station. Effectively, this bridge would connect Bayonne
“Proper” (where most of its residents are located) to recently developed residential and
commercial properties on the east side of Route 440.
2. INTRODUCTION
Public participation is required to identify community issues and concerns are addressed that
will achieve and build community support of the proposed project. The goals of the PE Public
Involvement Action Plan (PIAP) are as follows:
•
Continue the on-going public partnership between the project team, City of Bayonne,
the residents\business owners in the project area, and potential users of the proposed
bridge.
•
To have early, frequent, and continuous consultation with the public by committing to
public notification of the affected parties and providing opportunities for citizen input on
the project.
•
Continue building public support for the project.
•
Keep the public up to date on the progress of project details and refinement of the
details related to the proposed bridge.
The PIAP for this Preliminary Engineering phase will identify critical points for public
involvement. Each identified point includes the intended audience, a tentative schedule,
objectives, strategies, and deliverables.
3. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Several community meetings were held during the CD phase, including a PIC in August of 2023.
During this PIC the PPA was presented to the public and was well received overall. The
following meetings were held during the Concept Development phase of the project:
Meeting Purpose
Date
Stakeholder Meeting #1
December 16, 2022
Stakeholder Meeting #2
April 6, 2023
Public Information Center
August 2, 2023
City Council Caucus
Meeting
August 9, 2023
City Council Meeting
August 16, 2023
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between
the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail
Station and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Page 4 of 5
4. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
In an effort to maintain community involvement, presentations or other education events will be
scheduled to provide information and solicit input, comments and recommendations from the
diverse group of stakeholders that were established during the CD Phase.
4.1 PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTER:
A Public Information Center is recommended for Fall 2024. Refined project details including
bridge, sidewalk, drainage, landscape, detour, and constructability details will be presented.
This event can be a standalone presentation in the municipal building, or it can be attached to
an existing event such as a Farmers Market, Music or Cultural Festival, or other event. This will
be coordinated with the City of Bayonne.
Meeting Objectives:
•
Present progressed project details, constructability, detours, and project impacts.
•
Solicit input/comments from the public.
Deliverables:
•
Draft/Final Meeting Agendas
•
Draft/Final Meeting Summary
•
Display Boards
•
PowerPoint Presentation
•
PIC Notification Letter
•
Legal Notices
4.2 STAKEHOLDER MEETING:
If deemed necessary, hold smaller key stakeholder meetings (up to two) with the stakeholders
identified in the CD phase of the project and include any additional stakeholders identified as
the project progresses.
Meeting Objectives:
•
Present project updates, progress, and refined details of the proposed project.
•
Solicit input/comments from stakeholders.
Deliverables:
•
Draft/Final Meeting Agendas
•
PowerPoint Presentation
•
Draft/Final Meeting Summary
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 Between
the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail
Station and The Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN
Page 5 of 5
5. DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT
To facilitate a high level of public engagement, the project website should continue to be
maintained to play a major role in the public involvement process. The webpage will help
communicate with the public, disseminate project updates, and provide a source for public
feedback. The webpage will have translation options for the language identified by the City of
Bayonne (Spanish, Arabic, Polish, and Tagalog). Updates to the project website should be
coordinated with the City of Bayonne.
Deliverables:
•
Project Website Content
•
Project Website Domain
Appendix AA
Preliminary Engineering Scope
Statement
583 |
360 |
591 |
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Purpose: The Preliminary Engineering Scope Statement lists the proposed project’s deliverables and the activities required to
create those deliverables. The scope statement also provides a common understanding of the proposed project’s scope to
stakeholders, subject matter experts, and the designer and lists the proposed project’s major objectives. It enables the Project
Manager to perform more detailed planning, it helps guide the design team’s work during execution, and provides the baseline for
evaluating whether change requests or additional work are contained within or outside the proposed project’s boundaries.
Notes: The intent of the Preliminary Engineering (PE) Scope Statement is to provide useful project information to designers who
are interested in becoming the designer of record for PE and possibly Final Design and Construction for this project. In addition, it
will be used to solicit a man-hour estimate and cost proposal. The PE Scope Statement identifies the key elements of PE that are
necessary to advance the proposed project to the Final Design (FD) Phase.
The PE Scope Statement is developed by the Division of Project Management (DPM) Project Manager and the Concept
Development (CD) Designer near the conclusion of CD, prior to requesting the services of a designer to perform PE. The Scope of
Work section is approved by the appropriate Subject Matter Experts (SME).
Section 1 of the document focuses on Proposed Project Identification Information and CD data including the location and
description. Section 2 of the document specifies the Scope of Work for PE.
PROPOSED PROJECT IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION
PROPOSED PROJECT SPECIFICS
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 2 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Proposed Project Name
Limits
City of Bayonne Pedestian Bridge over Route 440 Between
the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light Rail (HBLR) Station
and the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH)
Intersetction of Route 440 and E. 32nd Street/Lefante Way (MP
20.98) and intersection of Route 440 and Goldsborough Drive
(MP 21.30).
NJDOT Project Manager
NJDOT Executive Regional Manager
Paul Miranda
Girishkuma C. Patel
Counties
Municipalities
Hudson Not Selected Not Selected
City of Bayonne
UPC Number
DB Number
17356
Legislative District(s)
31
Congressional District (s)
8
Route
440
Start Milepost
20.98
End Milepost
21.30
Alternate Route
Alternate Start Milepost
Alternate End Milepost
STIP Information
Structure Numbers
Project Classification:
1 - New Construction
MPO
PROPOSED PROJECT ESTIMATE
List the Proposed Project estimates for each category from Concept Development.
Project Item:
CD Phase Estimated Amount
ROW
$0.00
Utility Relocation
$1,800,000.00
Construction
$6,901,815.44
Construction Engineering
$1,118,094.10
Contingencies
$262,054.46
Total
$10,081,964.00
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION
Date of Concept Development Report:
November
2023
Date of Federal Approval of CD Report:
Date of CPC decision to advance project to PE:
CD Designer:
TYLin
PE to be Completed by (check one):
In-House
Consultant
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 3 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Purpose and Need: The purpose of this project is to construct a pedestrian bridge connecting pedestrians and bicyclists from the
east side of Route 440 just south of Goldsborough Drive to the west side of Route 440 and the 34th Street Hudson Bergen Light
Rail (HBLR) station.
There is an increased demand for a safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing of Route 440 due to the newly constructed residential
housing and shopping destinations at the Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (PABH) and adjoining South Cove Commons retail center
to the east of Route 440. A safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing of Route 440 would serve the needs of comminity members living
in the PABH housing so they could access destinations on the west side of Route 440 including the 34th Street HBLR station and
destinations on Avenue E and Broadway. It would also serve the needs of community memebers living west of Route 440,
allowing them to safely access shopping destinations such as Costco, CVS, Lidl, and the stores located in South Cove Commons as
well as the future ferry terminal and the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway. The existing pedestrian crossing of Route 440 closest
to the Goldsborough Drive intersection is an at-grade crossing at 32nd Street, approximately 0.25 miles south of the project area.
Because of this, many pedestrians and bicyclists' resort to crossing Route 440 wherever it is convenient for them, often crossing
two lanes of heavy traffic and hopping over the concrete median barrier before crossing two more additional lanes of traffic.
Description of Preliminary Preferred Alternative: The Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA) consists of a covered,
prefabricated single span steel truss bridge that will connect to the existing pier for the 34th Street HBLR station pedestrian bridge
on the west side of Route 440, and provide an landing with an elevator and stairs on the east side of Route 440. Sidewalk along
Route 440 northbound will be reconstructed from Goldsborough Drive to Port Terminal Boulevard. Creating a bicycle lane or
shared use path extending between Port Terminal Blvd. and Goldsborough Drive shall be investigated during the PE phase of the
project. The PPA also includes minor drainage improvements along Route 440 northbound.
Project Goals and Objectives: The project's goals and objectives are as follows:
1. Safe and efficient pedestrian crossing of Route 440 in vicinity of Goldsborough Drive
2. Keep the public and stakeholders informed about the project through all phases
3. Encourage the public to use the new pedestrian crossing
4. Minimize impacts to Route 440, stakeholders, and utilities
5. Maintain a 17’-0” minimum vertical underclearance and sight distance to traffic signal
6. Minimize impacts to traffic on Route 440 and Goldsborough Dr. during construction
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING INFORMATION (to be filled in upon selection of a designer)
PE Designer:
FMIS Contract ID Number (e.g., 89 00766):
Funding Source:
Agreement Number (e.g., 2001PM03):
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 5 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES
3.1 Preliminary Engineering
Initiation
Utility Agreement
3.9 Preliminary Engineering Report
Kickoff Meeting Minutes
Subsurface Utility Engineering Test
Pit Report
Approved Project Plan
3.2 Roadway Engineering
Utility Risk Analysis
Construction Cost Estimate
Control Survey Report
Railroad Diagnostic Team Meeting
Memo of Record
Design Exception Report
Topographic Survey
3.6 Quality Management
Final Design Scope Statement
Base Maps
PE Quality Management Certification
Project Management Plan (Major
Projects
Preliminary Drainage Design Report
3.7 Communications
Alternatives Analysis Report
Traffic Engineering Facility Location
Design Communications Report
Core Group Meeting Minutes
Constructability-Risk Analysis
Workshop Comments
3.8 Environmental Documents
Final Design Public Involvement
Action Plan
Preliminary ITS Facility Design Plans
Technical Environmental Studies
Complete Streets Checklist
Updated Preliminary Detour and
Construction Staging Plans
Air Study
3.10 Contracts
Preliminary Roadway Plans
Noise Study
Final Design Addendum
Pavement Design Data
Ecology Study
Final Design Designer Fee Proposal
Pavement Recommendation
Hazardous Waste Study
Final Invoice
Lighting Warrant Analysis Report
Socio-Economic Study
Final Design Independent Cost Estimate
Initial Deforestation/ Reforestation
Plan
Cultural Resources Study
Summary Independent Cost Estimate
Report
Preliminary Construction Schedule
Section 4(f)
Final Design Schedule
3.3 Structural Engineering
Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
Final Design Budget
Structural Design Recommendation
Summary
Programmatic Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Notice of Authorization
Preliminary Geotechnical
Engineering Report
De Minimis Section 4(f) Evaluation
3.11 Preliminary Engineering
Approvals
3.4 Right of Way and Access
Net Benefit Section 4(f) Evaluation
Capital Program Screening Committee
Recommendation
Project Access Plan
Executive Order 215 (E.O. 215)
Document
Capital Program Committee Approval
Access Impact Summary
Environmental Impact Statement
FHWA Approval
Right of Way Report
Record of Decision (ROD)
Right of Way Impact Plan
Categorical Exclusion Document
Initial Right of Way Estimate
Certified Categorical Exclusion
Document
3.5 Utility Engineering
Environmental Assessment
Utility Base Plans
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI)
Utility Letter No. 2
Environmental Commitments/Plan
Sheets
Utility Engineering Funding
Authorization
Historic Sites Council Concurrence
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 6 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS
List any commitments made to the public, local officials or other government agencies:
Project Commitment
Unit Requesting
the Commitment
Unit Fulfilling
Commitment
Special Needs
On-ramp from Port Terminal Blvd. to Rt.
440 NB to be closed to traffic for
approximately 1 year.
Designer
Direct traffic to detour
route.
Route 440 between Port Terminal Blvd.
and Goldsborough Dr. to be closed to
traffic for one night weekend.
Designer
Direct traffic to detour
route.
Proposed east landing will not require the
purchase of additional ROW
City of Bayonne
Designer
Existing sidewalks at Goldsborough Dr.
and Port Terminal Blvd. be connected
with new concrete sidewalk.
City of Bayonne
Designer
Existing PSE&G aerial utilities can be
relocated underground
Designer
PSE&G
Existing aerial cable and
telecommunications utilities can be
lowered on existing poles
Designer
Verizon and
Altice
USA/Cablevision
List any anticipated commitments that may be made:
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 7 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
APPROVAL
Name
Title
Date Approved
Manager
Bureau of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Solutions
Project Manager
Division of Project Management
Executive Regional Manager
Division of Project Management
Director
Division of Project Management
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 8 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SCOPE OF WORK
Table of Contents
Page
Right of Way .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Access ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Drainage Management ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Regional Maintenance ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Hydrology and Hydraulics ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Landscape ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13
Environmental ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 15
Value Engineering ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Utilities .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Jurisdiction ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
Geometrics & Roadway ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 28
Design Exceptions ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
Pavement........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 32
Structures ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 33
Geotechnical .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 36
Survey ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 37
Railroads ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 39
Construction & Risk Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40
Traffic Engineering ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 41
Electrical Maintenance................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43
Traffic Operations and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Engineering ............................................................................................................................... 44
Commuter Mobility ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45
Technical and Administrative Activities ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 46
Summary of Approvals .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 49
NOTE: The PE Designer will perform the tasks associated with PE as so marked, in preparation for Final Design. The Project Manager will review and negotiate
the proposal, execute the Agreement and instruct the designer to begin work. The Project Manager will direct the proposed project through PE.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 9 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Right of Way
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3110
Prepare ROW Report
Yes
No
Designer
3115
Initiate ROW Impact Plan
Yes
No
Designer
3120
Hold ROW Kickoff Meeting
Yes
No
ROW
DPM
Designer
3125
Prepare Initial ROW Estimate
Yes
No
ROW
DPM
Total Number of Parcels: 2
1. Fee Parcel /Easements
Number of fee parcels (partial):
2
Number of fee parcels (entire):
0
Number of residential relocations:
0
Number of permanent easements
(E parcels):
1
Number of temporary easements:
1
Number of commercial relocations:
0
2. List any known or potential environmental problems or issues that may impact Right of Way processes or decisions (cross reference with the
Environmental section of the Scope Statement document: N/A
3. List any environmentally sensitive parcels (ESPs), underground storage tanks, freshwater wetlands: N/A
4. Identify Riparian Parcels (currently flowed), Easements and/or Green Acres Diversions by contacting NJDEP for any Right of Way to be acquired:
N/A
5. Identify parcels that can be eliminated by design change modifications and attempts to mitigate damages suffered by the remaining properties. N/A
6. Decision to expand parcel for further use or contingency. N/A
7. List the number of Non Real Estate Engineering (NRE) parcels. 0
8. List any commitments and conditions made to the public or to private property owners that may impact Right of Way processes or decisions:
Commitment to connect the proposed pedestrian bridge to the existing NJ Transit pedestrian structure on NJ Transit property may impact the ROW process or
decisions.
9. Green Acres mitigation method:
Dollar Reimbursement
Property Replacement
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 10 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include number and type of parcels, known environmental problems, riparian parcels, public commitments, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 11 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Access
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3105
Prepare Project Access Plan and Access Impact
Summary
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
OAD
Number of Adjustments:
0
Number of Modifications:
0
Number of Revocations:
0
1. Note any pending agreements or access applications within the proposed project limits: None
2. Are proposed left turn lanes in compliance with the Access Level?
Yes
No
3. Is the proposed Typical Section of the roadway in compliance with the Highway Access Code?
Yes
No
4. Total No. of Driveways impacted: 0
5. Any commercial properties with access modifications and/or Revocations that have potential impacts to site parking slots, circulations and operation of
business?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details of impact with Block and Lot Nos.
6. Any commercial properties that will require necessary assistance in the establishment of the alternative access (as per NJAC 16:47-4.33)?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details of assistance with Block and Lot Nos.
7. Any commercial properties that will require the preparation of an Access Impact Assistance (AIA) report?
Yes
No
If yes, provide Block and Lot Nos.
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include number of driveways impacted, pending agreements or major access permit applications, driveway
modifications causing circulation issues, alternative access issues, Access Impact Assistance issues, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 12 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Drainage Management
Regional Maintenance
Hydrology and Hydraulics
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3085
Prepare Preliminary Drainage Design
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Drainage Management
1. Identify all existing drainage deficiencies as per the Drainage Management System: None Identified
Regional Maintenance
2. Identify all existing drainage deficiencies (undersized system, excessive spread into travel lanes, insufficient inlets, flooding at low points, etc.): N/A
Hydrology and Hydraulics
3. List proposed improvements including outfalls (especially tidal): N/A
4. Is compliance with Stormwater Management rules triggered (> 1/4 acre new impervious surface, or 1 acre disturbance)?
Yes
No
5. Identify all NJDEP permits required: NJDEP Flood Hazard Area
6. List proposed structural Best Management Practices (BMP) (e.g., Bioretention System, Constructed Wetlands, extended detention basins, infiltration
system, wet ponds, porous pavement): N/A
7. List proposed nonstructural BMP (e.g., Vegetation and Landscaping, Minimize Site Disturbance, Impervious Area Management, and Time of
Concentration Modifications): N/A
8. Identify drainage outflow owner: Will property rights need to be acquired?
Yes
No
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include drainage deficiencies, new/improved outfalls, storm water management rules, permits, Best Management
Practices (structural and non-structural), easements/right-of-way, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 13 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Landscape
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3010
Determine and Calculate Deforested Areas
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
1. List any landscape architecture related commitments such as:
a. Wetland or Riparian Mitigation Planting:
b. Historic Site commitments
c. Vegetative Screens or Buffers
d. Noise Barrier Aesthetics:
e. Architectural Treatments on Bridge Retaining Walls:
f. Tree Removal Mitigation:
g. Urban Design Work (paving, streetscapes, etc.):
Streetscape features similar to those existing along Goldsborough Dr. should be investigated to be
carried south along Rt. 440 NB at least to the proposed east landing structure.
h. Aesthetic plantings:
i. Existing tree preservation and protection:
j. Reforestation Application:
2. Anticipated visualization work for in-house and public information meetings:
a. Rendered Plans:
b. 2D computer generated before & after photographs:
c. 3D computer generated mode:
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 14 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include screens or buffers, aesthetic plantings, mitigation plantings, reforestation, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 15 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Environmental
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3300
Initiate Cultural Resources (Section 106) Process
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3305
Conduct CR Survey
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3310
Prepare CR Survey Report
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3315
Review CR Survey Report
Yes
No
BLAES
3320
Address Comments on CR Survey Report
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3325
Approve CR Survey Report
Yes
No
BLAES
3330
Obtain SHPO Concurrence (No Resources, No
Effect, No Adverse Effect)
Yes
No
BLAES
SHPO
3335
Prepare Draft MOA (Adverse Effect Only)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3340
Obtain SHPO Concurrence (No Adverse Effect with
Conditions or Adverse Effect)
Yes
No
BLAES
SHPO
3345
Obtain FHWA Approval of CR Survey Report
Yes
No
FHWA
BLAES
3350
Prepare Adverse Effect Documentation & Submit to
FHWA (Adverse Effect Only)
Yes
No
BLAES
3355
FHWA Sends Adverse Effect Documentation to
ACHP
Yes
No
FHWA
3360
ACHP Reviews and Accepts or Declines
Participation
Yes
No
ACHP
3365
Resolve Adverse Effects
Yes
No
BLAES
FHWA
3370
Circulate MOA for Comment
Yes
No
BLAES
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 16 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3375
Prepare Final MOA
Yes
No
BLAES
3380
Execute the MOA
Yes
No
BLAES
DPM
FHWA
ACHP
SHPO
3390
Submit Historic Sites Council Application
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
SHPO
3395
Present to Historic Sites Council
Yes
No
BLAES
Historic Sites
Council
3400
Inform Jurisdictional Agency Regarding
Programmatic Section 4(f) Impacts
Yes
No
BLAES
3405
Receive Concurrence Regarding Programmatic
Section 4(f) Impacts
Yes
No
Jurisdictional
Agencies
3410
Prepare Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3420
Prepare De Minimis Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3425
Prepare Programmatic Net Benefit Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3430
NJDOT Reviews Programmatic Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
3435
Revise Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
(NJDOT Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3440
FHWA Reviews Programmatic Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
FHWA
3445
Revise Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
(FHWA Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3450
FHWA Approves Programmatic Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
FHWA
3460
Inform Jurisdictional Agency Regarding Draft
Individual Section 4(f) Impacts
Yes
No
BLAES
3465
Receive Concurrence Regarding Draft Individual
Section 4(f) Impacts
Yes
No
Jurisdictional
Agencies
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 17 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3470
Prepare Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3475
NJDOT Reviews Draft Individual Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
3480
Revise Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
(NJDOT Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3485
FHWA Reviews and Comments on Draft Individual
Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
FHWA
3490
Revise Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
(FHWA Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3495
Conduct Draft Individual Section 4(f) Legal
Sufficiency Review
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3500
Circulate Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3505
Prepare Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3510
FHWA Approves Final Individual Section 4(f)
Evaluation
Yes
No
FHWA
3520
Inform Green Acres Program and Local Officials
Yes
No
BLAES
3525
Receive Concurrence on Green Acres Impacts
Yes
No
Green Acres Prog.
Local Officials
3530
Hold Green Acres Pre-Application Meeting
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3535
Negotiate Green Acres Compensation
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
Green Acres Prog.
Local Officials
ROW Tech. Support
3540
Identify Alternatives (EA Only)
Yes
No
BLAES
DPM
Designer
3545
Prepare EA or EA/4(f)
Yes
No
Designer
3550
NJDOT Reviews EA
Yes
No
BLAES
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 18 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3555
Revise EA (NJDOT Comments)
Yes
No
Designer
3560
FHWA Reviews EA
Yes
No
FHWA
3565
Revise EA (FHWA Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3570
FHWA Approves EA
Yes
No
FHWA
3575
Conduct Draft Individual Section 4(f) Legal
Sufficiency Review (EA)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3580
Circulate EA
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3585
Hold EA Public Hearing and Comment Period
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
CCR
3590
Address EA Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3595
Submit FONSI Request Package
Yes
No
BLAES
3600
FHWA Approves Final Individual Section 4(f) (EA)
Yes
No
FHWA
3605
FHWA Reviews and Issues FONSI
Yes
No
FHWA
3610
Publish Notice of FONSI Availability
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
CCR
3620
Publish Notice of Intent in Federal Register (EIS
Only)
Yes
No
BLAES
FHWA
3625
Invite Cooperating Agencies (EIS Only)
Yes
No
FHWA
3630
Hold NEPA Scope Meeting (EIS Only)
Yes
No
BLAES
DPM
Designer
FHWA
3635
Prepare Alternatives Analysis Report
Yes
No
BLAES
DPM
Designer
3640
Prepare DEIS or DEIS/4(f)
Yes
No
Designer
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 19 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3645
NJDOT Reviews DEIS
Yes
No
BLAES
3650
Revise DEIS (NJDOT Comments)
Yes
No
Designer
3655
FHWA Reviews DEIS
Yes
No
FHWA
3660
Revise DEIS (FHWA Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3665
FHWA Approves DEIS to Circulate
Yes
No
FHWA
3670
Publish Notice of Availability in Federal Register
(DEIS)
Yes
No
BLAES
EPA
3675
Circulate DEIS
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3680
Hold EIS Public Hearing and Comment Period
Yes
No
BLAES
CCR
Designer
3685
Address Public and Agency Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3690
Select Final Alternative
Yes
No
DPM
FHWA
SME’s
3215
Present to Capital Program Screening Committee
Yes
No
DPM
3220
Capital Program Committee Approves Final
Alternative
Yes
No
DPM
CPC
3700
Prepare and Submit FEIS
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3705
FHWA Reviews and Comments on FEIS
Yes
No
FHWA
3710
Address FEIS Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3715
FHWA Reviews FEIS for Legal Sufficiency and
Approval
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
FHWA
3720
Publish EIS Notice of Availability in Newspaper
Yes
No
BLAES
CCR
3725
Publish FEIS Notice in Federal Register
Yes
No
BLAES
EPA
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 20 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3730
FHWA Publishes ROD in Federal Register
Yes
No
FHWA
3735
Circulate FEIS
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3740
Conduct Air Quality Study
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3745
Prepare Air Quality TES
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3750
NJDOT Reviews Air Quality TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3755
Address Air Quality TES Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3760
Approve Air Quality TES
Yes
No
FHWA
BLAES
3765
Conduct Ecology Study
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
Wetland Delineation
3770
Prepare Ecology TES
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3775
NJDOT Reviews Ecology TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3780
Address Ecology TES Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3785
Approve Ecology TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3790
Conduct Socio-Economic Study
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3795
Prepare Socio-Economic TES
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3800
NJDOT Reviews Socio-Economic TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3805
Address Socio-Economic TES Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3810
Approve Socio-Economic TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3815
Conduct Noise Study
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3820
Prepare Noise TES
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 21 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3825
NJDOT Reviews Noise TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3830
Address Noise TES Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3835
Approve Noise TES
Yes
No
BLAES
FHWA
3840
Conduct Hazardous Waste Study
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3845
Prepare Hazardous Waste TES
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3850
NJDOT Reviews Hazardous Waste TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3855
Address Hazardous Waste TES Comments
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3860
Approve Hazardous Waste TES
Yes
No
BLAES
3865
Hold Public Information Center
Yes
No
BLAES
CCR
Designer
DPM
3870
Prepare CED
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3875
NJDOT Reviews and Approves CED
Yes
No
BLAES
3880
Initiate Environmental Technical Studies
Yes
No
BLAES
3890
Prepare Certified Categorical Exclusion (CCED)
Document
Yes
No
BLAES
3900
Review and Approve Certified Categorical Exclusion
Document (CCED)
Yes
No
BLAES
3910
Prepare Draft EO 215 Document
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3920
NJDOT Reviews Draft EO 215 Document
Yes
No
BLAES
3925
Revise Draft EO 215 Document (NJDOT Comments)
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3930
NJDEP Reviews EO 215 Document
Yes
No
NJDEP
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 22 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3940
Address NJDEP Comments and Prepare Final EO
215 Document
Yes
No
BLAES
Designer
3945
NJDEP Approves EO 215 Document
Yes
No
NJDEP
Anticipated Environmental Document:
CCED
CED
EA
EIS
EO 215
Total Number of Permits: 1
1. List any environmental impacts and/or issues: Potential for work within areas regulated by Flood Hazard Area Rules. Federal bat species are
present. The project is located within a groundwater CEA.
2. List any environmental commitments (made in approved environmental documents, through Memoranda of Agreement with environmental agencies,
other commitments made to the public, local officials or other government agencies such as 4f, Section 106 (historic architecture, archaeology), air,
noise, hazardous waste and ecology: None
3. Check the environmental clearances or permits required on the project:
Federal
U.S. Coast Guard (Bridge)
USACOE Section 10 (Navigable Waters)
USDOA Forms AS-1006
USACOE Section 404 (Individual/Nationwide) discharge of fill
USACOE Section 9 (Dam or Dike)
National (or State) Wild & Scenic Rivers
Section 7 Endangered Species Consultation
NMFS Essential Fish Habitat Study
State
CAFRA
Hazardous Waste Site Investigation (SI/RI)
NJDEP Tidal Wetlands
NJDEP Pollutant Discharge
NJDEP Water Lowering
HazWaste Remedial Action Work plan
NJDEP Waterfront Development
NJDEP Flood Hazard Area
NJDEP Riparian
NJDEP Sanitary Facilities
NJDEP Freshwater Wetlands
NJDEP Water Quality Certificate
NJDEP NJPDES Stormwater Construction GP (RFA)
Other
Delaware River Basin Commission
Hackensack Meadowlands Commission
Highlands Commission
Delaware & Raritan Canal Commission
Pinelands Commission
State Agriculture Development Commission
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 23 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include a list of the anticipated NEPA document, type of permits anticipated, anticipated environmental impacts and
environmental commitments made in CD if any, etc.
The project may require a NJDEP Flood Hazard Area Permit. Work is proposed in a known groundwater CEA. The City has remediation
approvals/plans in place. City of Bayonne has approved Master Waterfront Permit with NJDEP which may need to be revised for this project. The
project is not a major redevelopment. Any impacts to the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway will require Section 4(f) evaluation.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 24 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Value Engineering
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
Yes
No
Total Estimated Cost including Construction, ROW and Utilities:
$1-10 million
$10-20 million
$20-$40 million
>$40 million
Value Engineering Analysis Performed?
Yes
No
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include Value Engineering Analysis, and Cost information
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 25 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Utilities
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3035
Prepare Utility Base Plans
Yes
No
Designer
3040
Establish Utility Engineering Funding
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Program Coord.
3045
Send Letter No. 2 and Plans to Utility Company
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Utility Co.
3050
Prepare Utility Agreement
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3055
Conduct Utility Risk Analysis
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Utility Co.
3060
Execute Utility Agreement
Yes
No
DPM
Utility Co.
DAG
3080
Conduct Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE)
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
SUE Contractor
Utility Co.
3985
Update Utility Risk Assessment Plan
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Total Number of Utility Companies: 6
Utility Type
Utility Company
Size (Units of Measure)
Location (aerial/underground)
Gas
IMTT, Williams
16" and 14" Pipe
underground
Electric
PSE&G
Volts
aerial
Cable
Cablevision/Altice USA
Pairs/ Strands
aerial
Telephone
Verizon
Pairs/ Strands
aerial
Water
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer
Division
Pipe
underground
Sewer
City of Bayonne Water and Sewer
Division
Pipe
underground
Fiber-Optic (non-Department)
Cablevision/Altice USA
aerial
Other:
Other:
Other:
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 26 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Other:
1. Identify if the Utility Discover and Verification requires sub-surface utility exploration: Y
2. Is a SUE (Subsurface Utility Engineering) Consultant required?
Yes
No
3. Identify Potential Conflicts: Conflicts with existing aerial facilities on Route 440 Northbound with the proposed pedestrian bridge. Existing
underground utilites are potential conflicts on the east landing foundation.
4. Identify Temporary Relocations that are needed during construction: Electric, Cable, Fiber Optic
5. Number of poles? 9
6. Number of guy wires on existing poles? 12
7. Are there cell towers or substations? N
8. Can utility relocations be avoided or performed in advance of the project? Y
9. Can utility design/construction be performed by designer/contractor? N
10. Can ROW needed for utilities be identified? N/A
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include location of cell towers, location/presence of fiber optic lines, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 27 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Jurisdiction
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
Yes
No
Total Number of Maps: Total Number of Agreements:
Are there streetscape or esthetic items intended for this project?
Yes
No
If yes, has a resolution of support been acquired for jurisdictional assignment?
Yes
No
NA
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include the anticipated number of maps and agreements, presence of streetscape or aesthetic treatments, local approval
of such, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 28 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Geometrics & Roadway
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3030
Prepare Horizontal & Vertical Geometry
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3070
Prepare Preliminary Roadway Plans
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
SME’s
3135
Prepare Construction Cost Estimate
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3165
Finalize Project Plan
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Construction Plans/Estimated Number of Sheets
Roadway and Bridges
1
Key Map
0
Grades
0
Method of Cross Sections
1
Estimate-Distribution of Quantities
9
Traffic Control and Staging Plans
0
Cross Sections
1
Typical Sections
0
Traffic Control Plans
0
Alternate Retaining Wall System
1
Plan Sheet Index
0
ITS Plans
1
Estimate of Quantities – Bridge
1
Construction Plans
1
Electrical Details
1
Earthwork Summary
1
Environmental Plans
0
Traffic Signal Plans
0
Earthwork Chart Sheet
0
Profiles
1
Highway Lighting Plans
0
Non-standard Roadway Construction Details
1
Ties
1
Landscape Plans
5
Non-standard Bridge Construction Details
1
Traffic Signing and Striping Plans
1
Drainage Plans
Right of Way Documents
0
Entire Tract Map
0
Tabulation Sheets
0
Individual Property Maps (IPM)
0
General Property Parcel Maps
0
Parcel Descriptions
0
Alignment Sheets
Other Documents
1
Jurisdictional Maps
3
Utility Agreements Plans
0
Railroad Crossing Element Plans
1
Project Specific Specifications
Are there any additional documents?
Yes
No
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 29 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Please identify any additional documents:
1. Existing Roadway(s):
Roadway No. 1
Roadway No. 2
Roadway No. 3
Roadway No. 4
Roadway Name:
Route 440
Posted Speed(s):
40 mph
Highway Classification:
Urban Principal Arterial
Significance (local or regional):
Regional
No. of Interchanges:
0
Traffic Volumes:
51,521 ADT
Design Speeds:
45 mph
Development Class:
No. of Traffic Signals:
1
No. of Intersections:
2
2. Typical Section(s):
Typical Section No. 1
Typical Section No. 2
Typical Section No. 3
Typical Section No. 4
Right of Way width:
123'
Number of Lanes:
3 lanes NB, 2 lanes SB
Lane width & cross slope:
12'
Shoulder width & cross slope:
14' on SB. No shoulder on
NB
Median width:
17.5'
Sidewalk/border width:
4'-6" sidewalk on NB
Median description and the
overall roadway width:
Median barrier separating
NB and SB. Overall width is
94.5'
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 30 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3. Intersection/Interchange (describe the existing intersection and/or interchanges including turning and auxiliary lanes.): The Route 440/Goldsborough
Drive intersection is a signalized T intersection. Goldsborough Drive WB has two left turn only lanes and one right turn only lane; Goldsborough Drive EB
consists of two lanes which reduces down to one lane east of the intersection; Route 440 SB consists of two through lanes and one left turn only lane; Route 440
NB consists of three through lanes. The Route 440/Prospect Street intersection consists of two Route 440 SB through lanes, one exit lane onto Prospect Street
SB, and one on ramp from Prospect Street NB. The Route 440/Port Terminal Boulevard intersection consists of two Route 440 NB through lanes, one exit lane to
Port Terminal Boulevard EB, and one on ramp from Port Terminal Boulevard WB.
4. Existing Deficiencies (provide an overview of the existing deficiencies. Geometric: Substandard horizontal and vertical sight distance, insufficient sight
triangle, substandard vertical clearance, substandard or no shoulders, acceleration/deceleration lanes, etc. Safety Issues: check crash data for indicators of
specific problems. Substandard/nonexistent guiderail, attenuators, pavement condition, skid resistance, median, etc. Note on substandard guiderail: the project
limits should be extended to include upgrading any existing substandard guiderail run that extends beyond the proposed work limits as required by the Design
Manual.): The existing guide rail within the project limits does not meet the current MASH requirements.
5. Proposed Improvements (provide a brief narrative of the proposed improvements and how they address the identified deficiencies. Note changes to be made
to profiles, alignment, guiderail, and typical section): The proposed project will construct a pedestrian bridge which will accommodate safe crossing for
pedestrians and bicyclists over Route 440. The proposed design will also provide an access elevator and ADA compliant sidewalks to connect to existing
facilities.
6. Bicycle/Pedestrian Compatible?
Yes
No
If no, please explain:
7. List any commitments made to the public, local officials or other government agencies: Refer to summary of commitments on page 6.
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include a discussion of substandard design elements, design exceptions, and perhaps a quick description of the proposed
geometry if it is unusual, commitments made to the community, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 31 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Design Exceptions
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3150
Prepare Design Exception Report
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
QMS
State Trans. Engr.
FHWA
1. Design Exception(s):
a. Is a Design Exception required?
Yes
No
b. List substandard features that are to remain and require Design Exception:
c. Has the Design Exception Crash Analysis been received from the Bureau of Safety Programs?
Yes
No
d. Has the Design Exception Crash Data for each controlling substandard design element been requested from the Bureau of Safety
Programs?
Yes
No
e. Has FHWA provided preliminary concurrence on the Design Exceptions decisions (a) and (b) above?
Yes
No
f. Has Geometric Solutions provided Reasonable Assurance on the Design Exceptions decisions (a) and (b) above
Yes
No
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include evidence of subsurface drainage issues, settlement problems, stability problems, etc.
Concept Development level assessment of the controlling substandard design elements revealed no substandard features and therefore a design
exception is not required, however this shall be confirmed during Preliminary Engineering.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 32 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Pavement
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3960
Obtain Pavement Design Data
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3970
Collect Existing Pavement and Subgrade Soil
Information
Yes
No
Pvmt. Design Unit
Designer
3975
Conduct Pavement Testing Program
Yes
No
Pvmt. Design Unit
Designer
3995
Preform Pavement Lifecycle Cost Analysis
Yes
No
Pvmt. Design Unit
Designer
3980
Prepare Pavement Recommendation
Yes
No
Pvmt. Design Unit
Designer
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include evidence of subsurface drainage issues, settlement problems, stability problems, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 33 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Structures
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3100
Prepare Structural Design Recommendation
Summary
Yes
No
Designer
SME’s
Total Number of New Bridges:
1
Total Number of New Spans:
1
Total Number of Rehab Bridges:
0
Total Number of Rehab Spans:
0
Total Number of Replacement Bridges:
0
Total Number of Replacement Spans:
0
1. Condition of existing bridge(s):
Bridge No. 1
Bridge No. 2
Bridge No. 3
Bridge No. 4
a. NJDOT Structure Number:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
b. Year Built:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
c. Date/type of any major modifications:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
d. Type & material of superstructure:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
e. Type and material of substructure:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
f. Feature that is spanned:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
g. Type of roadway it carries:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
h. Vertical Clearance of structure if it
spans a roadway or railroad:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
i. Number of Spans:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
j. Length of Structure:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
k. Width of Structure:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
l. Horizontal Clearance of the
pier/abutment with respect to the riding
lane:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
m. Typical Section (number of lanes, width
and cross slope and width of each
sidewalk):
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 34 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Bridge No. 1
Bridge No. 2
Bridge No. 3
Bridge No. 4
n. Parapet railing Type:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
o. Identify the structural deficiencies:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
p. Bridges over waterways (Identify
scouring evaluation, bridge opening
capacity, and frequency of storm):
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2. Proposed Bridge(s)/Bridge Improvements:
Bridge No. 1
Bridge No. 2
Bridge No. 3
Bridge No. 4
a. Number of spans:
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
b. Identify the type of maintenance of
traffic that will be used (staging or detour):
Rt. 440 will be detoured as
required during construction
N/A
N/A
N/A
c. Identify the changes to the typical
section of the existing structure:
New 12'-0" wide pedestrian
bridge
N/A
N/A
N/A
d. Vertical Clearance of structure if it
spans a roadway or railroad:
23'-10"
N/A
N/A
N/A
e. Length of Structure:
153'-10"
N/A
N/A
N/A
f. Width of Structure:
13'-0"
N/A
N/A
N/A
g. Horizontal Clearance of the
pier/abutment with respect to the riding
lane:
Rt. 440 SB clearance to
existing pier: 29'-3"
Rt. 440 NB clearance to
proposed east landing: 35'-9"
N/A
N/A
N/A
h. Typical Section (number of lanes, width
and cross slope and width of each
sidewalk):
12'-0" interior width of
pedestrian walkway
N/A
N/A
N/A
i. Parapet railing Type:
Chain-link fencing
N/A
N/A
N/A
j. Identify the structural deficiencies:
None
N/A
N/A
N/A
k. Coast Guard Permit Required:
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Are the minimum vertical clearance requirements over waterways, roadways, railroads met?
Yes
No
a. If no, please explain? N/A
4. List other substandard features of proposed bridge: None
5. Other Existing Structure(s):
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 35 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
a. Identify existing minor structures (Noise barriers, Retaining Walls (cast in place or alternate system), Gabions, High Tower Lighting
foundations, Pre-cast Culverts, Culvert extensions, Type and number of Overhead Sign Structures): There is an existing pedestrian bridge to the
west of the proposed pedestrian bridge.
b. Specify type and number of each substandard feature: N/A
6. Proposed Other Structure(s):
Structure No. 1
Structure No. 2
Structure No. 3
Structure No. 4
a. Identify changes in the existing minor
structure that are being improved:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
b. List substandard features to be included in
the design exception:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
c. Length:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
d. Width:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
e. Number of spans/units:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include scour, unusual existing or proposed structural elements, clearances, substandard elements, design exceptions,
etc.
The proposed pedestrian bridge will connect to the existing NJ Transit pedestrian bridge and to the existing NJ Transit pier. When the NJ Transit
pedestrian bridge was originally constructed, provisions were made for the connection of a future bridge across Rt. 440. It is assumed that the existing
pier was designed to support a proposed bridge over Rt. 440 but will need to be confirmed during the Preliminary Engineering phase.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 36 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Geotechnical
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3095
Prepare Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering
Report
Yes
No
Geotechnical
Engineering Unit
DPM
Designer
1. Is there evidence of subsurface drainage problems? No
2. Is there evidence of settlement problems? No
3. Is there evidence of stability problems? No
4. Is there evidence of scour problems? No
5. Are there existing soil-borings within the project limits? There are numerous borings in the NJDOT GDMS along route 440 in the general
vicinity of the proposed two tower foundations though likely not at the precise locations of the foundations. New borings are recommended at
the two tower foundation locations
6. Are there rock slopes/cuts located within the project limits? No
a. Are the rock cuts listed in the Rockfall Hazard Rating System? No rock cuts were observed.
b. Do catchment areas need to be cleaned or modified? Rock fall catchment areas do not apply, given no rock cuts were observed.
c.
Are there apparent safety problems with protruding rock, sight lines, rock-fall and substandard existing mitigation measures? No
7. Alternate site exploration (test pits)? Test pits were not encountered in the review of the NJDOT GDMS’s nearby exploration locations
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include rock slope issues, soil borings, scour, unusual existing or proposed structural elements, clearances, etc.
It is recommended to perform new borings at each of the two tower foundation locations to provide detailed strata information, groundwater
elevations, and samples for laboratory testing of the engineering characteristics of soil and any rock encountered.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 37 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Survey
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3015
Prepare Control Survey Report
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Geodetic Survey
3020
Conduct Topographic Survey
Yes
No
Designer
Geodetic Survey
3025
Prepare Base Maps
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Geodetic Survey
CADD Support
1. Identify available mapping information (aerial/conventional methods): Aerial
2. How were the existing and proposed baselines established? N/A
3. How were the existing and proposed ROW lines established? Tax Maps and Existing Plans
4. How was the horizontal and vertical control established; and which existing monumentation was used? As-built plans
5. Is project in Tidal area?
Yes
No
If yes, then current mean high water elevation must be established in tidal water areas under Tidelands Bureau jurisdiction.
6. Has NJDOT Regional Survey office been contacted regarding existing Control, and as-built plans within the project? No
7. Compliance with MAP filing law required?
Yes
No
8. Has NJDOT Geodetic Survey been contacted regarding existing control within the project?
Yes
No
9. Does Primary Control exist within the project limits or immediately adjacent to the project?
Yes
No
If yes, what year was control established in? 2016
If no, will primary control be required?
10. Will plans be developed from aerial photogrammetry or as-built plans and conventional survey? Aerial Photography
11. Geodetic Survey Services will be provided by:
In-House
Consultant
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 38 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include base mapping obtained in CD, tidal issues, compliance with MAP filing laws, geodetic control issues, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 39 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Railroads
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3075
Hold Diagnostic Team Meeting
Yes
No
Railroad Eng. &
Safety Unit
DPM
Designer
Railroads Affected
Select RR Line Select RR Line 2 Select RR Line 3
1. Grade Crossings Affected?
Yes
No
a.
How many?
2. Is there sufficient overhead structure clearance?
Yes
No
3. Diagnostic Team Meeting Required:
Yes
No
4. Diagnostic Team Meeting Held: (DATE)
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include presence of at-grade crossings, overhead structure clearances, diagnostic team meetings, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 40 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Construction & Risk Analysis
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3130
Update Preliminary Detour and Construction Staging
Plans
Yes
No
Designer
TSSE
SME’s
3145
Conduct Preliminary Engineering Constructability-
Risk Analysis Workshop
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
Const. Mgmt.
Risk Analysis to be Performed?
Yes
No
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include commitments made to local officials or other agencies, staging details, detour discussion, schedule constraints,
utility conflicts, etc.
Construction Staging will be completed in one main stage which includes a slight traffic shift of Route 440 NB and the closure of the on-ramp at Port
Terminal Blvd. The main work includes relocation of aerial utilities along Route 440 NB, construction of east landing, elevator, stairs, and sidewalk. The
prefabricated bridge will be erected during a one-night weekend closure of Route 440.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 41 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Traffic Engineering
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3090
Determine Traffic Engineering Facility Locations
Yes
No
TSSE
Designer
Number of New Traffic Signals:
0
Number of Revised Traffic Signals:
0
New overhead signs and sign
structures
Yes
No
Revised overhead signs and sign
structures
Yes
No
New Guide Signs
Yes
No
Revised Guide Signs
Yes
No
Number of Roundabouts:
0
Emergency signal pre-emption
Yes
No
Revised Highway Lighting
Yes
No
Temporary Lighting "for staging
and diversion roadways”
Yes
No
Raised Pavement Markers
Yes
No
1. Maintenance of Traffic: (What type of maintenance of traffic will be used during construction, i.e. staging, detour, permanent lane closures, or diversion road):
The majority of construction will be will be done with a slight traffic shift of Route 440 NB with PCCB protection and the closure of the on-ramp at Port
Terminal Blvd. During this stage, all the work for the east landing will be performed including utility relocations, structure foundation, elevator, stairs, sidewalk
and drainage inprovements. A detour around Port Teminal Blvd towards Goldsborough Drive will be provided for vehicles trying to enter Route 440 from Port
Terminal Blvd. A right shoulder closure on Route 440 SB will also be provided for any preparation work on the existing bridge pier prior to the erection of the
bridge structure. Lastly, the prefabricated bridge structure will be erected during a one-night weekend closure of Route 440. Multiple detours will be provided to
accommodate all movements.
2. Identify the number and location of temporary traffic signal(s) required during Staging or Detours: 0
3. Is there an adequate corner ROW cutout for signal equipment installation?
Yes
No
4. Identify if a new or revised traffic signal agreement is required: No
5. Identify overhead utility conflicts for traffic signals to be identified and resolved: None
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 42 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include discussion of need for temporary signals, right-of-way constraints (related to traffic signal equipment), utility
conflicts, etc.
Lighting warrant analysis will be required to determine what proposed lighting (if any) is required for pedestrians in the vicinity of the proposed
bridge.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 43 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Electrical Maintenance
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
Yes
No
1. Do any elements of this project scope require additional planned maintenance activities that would necessitate an increase in personnel or
equipment resources?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details:
2. Do any elements of this project scope include new roadway/electrical appurtenances that would require specialized training, equipment or
materials to properly maintain the item (e.g., Vortech drainage chamber, ornamental lighting, and brick pavers)?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details:
3. Does this project scope include or overlap sections of roadway that are simultaneously being planned or scheduled for Operations
maintenance/construction activities?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details:
4. Should consideration be given to canceling or postponing the Operations activity?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details:
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include elements of the design that will necessitate an increase in maintenance personnel or equipment, conflicting or
overlapping projects with Operations, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 44 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Traffic Operations and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Engineering
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3065
Prepare Preliminary ITS Facility Design
Yes
No
Designer
ITS
Traffic Ops
1. Project scope complies with the requirements of the latest ITS Investment Strategy and ITS Architecture?
Yes
No
2. Traffic Operations (North/ South) has been consulted for needs and impacts?
Yes
No
Identify needs and impacts.
3. Transportation Data Development has been consulted for needs and impacts?
Yes
No
Identify needs and impacts.
4. Project limits have been visually inspected for the existing ITS facilities?
Yes
No
5. Check if the project includes the construction or relocation of any of the following Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) facilities:
Controlled Traffic Signal Systems (CTSS)
Dynamic Message Signs (DMS)
Traffic Detection systems
Weigh-in-Motion (WIM)
Roadway Weather Information Systems (RWIS)
Fiber Optic Conduit and/or Cable
Closed Circuit TV Cameras (CCTV)
Highway Advisory Radio (HAR)
Bridge Sensors
Traffic Volume Stations
In-Road Sensors
Electrical or Communication Installations for the above systems
Other ITS Devices:
6. Check if real time work zone ITS Systems are to be deployed during construction:
Travel Time
Queue Detection
Dynamic Merge
Traffic Cameras
Variable Speed Limit or Advisory
Other
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include compliance with latest ITS Investment Strategy and Architecture, consultation with Traffic Ops during CD, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 45 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Commuter Mobility
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
Yes
No
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
Examples of information for this section include bicycle and pedestrian compatibility, Complete Streets compliance, presence of bus stops, interruption of
pedestrian accommodations during construction, ADA issues, etc.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 46 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Technical and Administrative Activities
Activity
No.
Activity Name
Execute
Responsible Unit
Comments
3005
Initiate Preliminary Engineering
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3160
Prepare Draft Preliminary Engineering Report
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3170
Prepare Final Design Scope Statement
Yes
No
SME’s
DPM
Designer
3175
Complete Preliminary Engineering Quality
Certification
Yes
No
Designer
3185
Prepare FD Public Involvement Action Plan
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
CCR
3195
Prepare Project Management Plan (Major Projects)
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3200
FHWA Approves Draft Project Management Plan
(Major Projects)
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
FHWA
3205
NJDOT Reviews Draft Preliminary Engineering
Report
Yes
No
DPM
SME’s
Designer
3210
FHWA Reviews and Approves Preliminary
Engineering Report
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
FHWA
3225
Assess Designer
Yes
No
DPM
3230
Develop FD Designer Fee Proposal
Yes
No
Designer
3235
Develop FD Independent Cost Estimate
Yes
No
DPM
OSBM
3240
Create FD Schedule
Yes
No
DPM
OSBM
3245
Negotiate FD Addendum
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
OSBM
3250
Approve FD Schedule
Yes
No
DPM
OSBM
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 47 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
3255
Develop FD Budget
Yes
No
DPM
OSBM
3260
Finalize FD Budget
Yes
No
DPM
3265
Approve FD Budget
Yes
No
DPM
OSBM
3270
Authorize Final Design
Yes
No
DPM
CIPD
3275
Execute FD Addendum
Yes
No
DPM
Designer
3285
Complete PE Closeout
Yes
No
DPM
1. Have the objectives of the Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP) been satisfied?
Yes
No
2. Number of Local Workshop Meetings conducted in CD: 1
3. Public Information Centers conducted in CD (number of meetings, location & dates): 1 meeting. Location: Council Chambers, Bayonne Municipal
Building (630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ 07002). Date: August 2, 2023, 6:00pm - 8:00 pm
4. Number of Officials Briefings conducted in Concept Development: Project was coordinated with local officials through the duration of the project as they
were the primary client. One presentation to the City Council was made on August 9, 2023.
5. List Issues, Commitments or Concerns: Refer to summary of commitments on page 6.
6. Is the mailing list up to date?
Yes
No
7. Are the Displays adequate to reuse in PE:
Yes
No
8. Resolution of Support Number:
Resolution of Support Date:
9. Other Coordination:
a. List additional organizations (Historic Society, Chamber of Commerce, Board of Education, Fire Company’s etc.) or authorities (NJ Transit, NJ
Turnpike, NJ Highway Authority, Port Authority, etc.) that have interest in the project: City of Bayonne, NJ Transit, PANYNJ, BOE, Police Department,
Fire Department, various community groups.
b. Proposed Formal Public Involvement Program (estimate number of Official Briefings and Public Info Centers/Meetings/Hearings): 1 PIC; 1
Stakeholder Meeting
c. If additional displays are required, provide the specifics (number, scale, special graphics 3D, simulations, models, etc): 5-6 display boards updated to
reflect work performed in PE phase, 48"x36", special graphics, simulations, or models are not required.
d. If a mailing list is required, provide the approximate number of property owners: 78
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 48 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Who is responsible for putting the mailing list together and providing mail labels?
Consultant?
In-house Design
Other (Specify)
e. If handouts are required (provide the specifics, number, size, color or black and white, mapping, etc): Color; 8.5x11
f. List special needs (i.e. Community Involvement Sub-Consultant, Facility Needs, Interpreter, Website, etc.): There is a project website
g. Traffic Staging: How many lanes of traffic need to be maintained? All Lanes
What will be the available working hours? TBD
Can the project duration be significantly reduced by reducing the number of stages? N
Can detours be used? Y
h. Schedule - Identify scheduling constraints (environmental, seasonal construction limitations, community). Winter Shutdown
What is the optimum period to start construction? March 15
i. Is the scope focused on replacement or rehabilitation of road/bridge? N
Is condition likely to change/deteriorate between scoping and construction? N
ADDITIONAL INPUT
This section has been provided for the CD designer and the functional units to state any assumptions, to clarify and customize standard activities, and to add
important information. Please be clear and concise. Provide your unit's contact person and number.
NJDOT Scope Statement
Preliminary Engineering
Revision 12
Page 50 of 50
Released: 4/2019
Pedestrian Bridge over Route 440 at 34th Street
Traffic Engineering
Electrical Maintenance
Traffic Operations & ITS
Commuter Mobility
The Bureau of Safety, Bicycle, and
Pedestrian Programs (BSBPP)
Protected Document Content
Start your free trial to view the raw municipal bid documents and web text.
Unlock Full AccessDetailed Risk Breakdown
local preference
No Flags Found
performance bond
No Flags Found
liquidated damages
No Flags Found
Quick Actions
Contacts
Explore More
Timeline
First Discovered
Apr 1, 2026
Last Info Update
Apr 1, 2026
Start your 7-day free trial
Get instant notifications and full bid analysis. Existing users will be logged in automatically.
Start Free Trial