OK. Route 1 is now off the table.
At least that’s what Gary Toth, director of the Division of Project Planning and Development for the state Department of Transportation, told the South Brunswick Industrial Commission today.
Mr. Toth told the commission during its business luncheon (attended by our reporter Paul Koepp) that widening Route 1 in South Brunswick would cost between $300 million and $400 million — a pricetag that includes design, purchase of land, construction and reconfiguration of most Route 1 indtersections. Given the fiscal problems facing the state (massive debt, an underfunded pension system, flat revenues and an empty road fund), the state “does not have the resources.”
This is not exactly the news that South Brunswick officials or residents were hoping to hear. Local officials say they’re not done fighting for the widening, though it appears South Brunswick will need a whole lot of help if it is to convince the DOT to put the widening back on the table.
I am the first to admit that traffic along the seven-mile stretch in South Brunswick is not nearly as bad as in other areas, but that does not mean that it is not bad or that the lack of a third lane will not have longterm impact.
So what gives? The DOT is focusing on two new approaches: 1.) spending on less-expesnive mass transportation, like bus-rapid transit systems, rather than on new highways and roads; and 2.) refocusing land-use to bring locate new housing near new jobs.
Both approaches are consistent with the aims of environmental and traffic planning groups like the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, which for years has been critical of the state building its way out of congestion.
I am all for expanding mass-transit options, especially along Route 1, though I am a bit doubtful that we will be able to convince New Jerseyans to get out of their cars. And I’d argue that widening the highway is not creating new infrastructure, but improving existing infrastructure — something that fits in with the state’s new approach.
As for the second change, I’m afraid it sounds like one of those ideas conceived by planners and engineers that look good on paper (or on their computer screens) but are destined to fail when applied to the real world.
The idea is to encourage towns to limit commute times by encouraging a reconsideration of the mix of housing and commercial development. Currently, not enough housing is being built to accommodate the people working in the warehouses and offices being built — meaning that workers have to get in their cars and drive. That clogs roads, lengthens commutes and worsens the myriad problems tied to traffic congestion (air pollution, exhaust residue in the water supply, driver aggravation, less time with families, etc.). Creating the right mix would, according to the state, shorten commute times and make everyone happy.
Except it won’t. First, homeowners are not likely to buy into this approach. People live where they like, but work where they can. Many factors dictate where we choose to live: Home prices, property taxes, neighborhoods, school systems, recreational programs, proximity to other family, etc. Proximity to work is only one small factor — and one that is becoming smaller and smaller as jobs become more precarious in the age of layoffs.
Homeowners are not likely to sell their homes in Hamilton, for instance, because they work at Dow Jones in South Brunswick, or sell their homes in Kendall Park to be closer to their jobs in Edison — unless there are other compelling reasons to do so, especially if there is even the smallest of chances that their job could be eliminated.
And this assumes that municipalities in New Jersey will be clamoring to build more housing — which is not likely given that the state’s current tax structure rewards towns that build warehouses and offices and penalizes them for building housing (warehouses produce tax revenue without school costs, considered a net gain; houses with kids, which is what we are talking about, rarely generate enough taxes to offset the cost of schooling).
In New Jersey, it seems, everything is tied to tax reform. If we are to remove this counterproductive incentive system, we have to streamline local government and change the way we pay for services — in particular, the public schools — so that development becomes a question of jobs and housing and not tax revenue.
In the end, however, that leaves South Brunswick with the only four-lane section of Route 1 between the Lawrence split and Woodbridge. And while the road in South Brunswick is not nearly as congested as it is to the north and south, it seems counterintuitive to me to leave a potential bottleneck in place.
South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick
The Cranbury Press Blog
E-mail me by clicking here.
Hank Kalet 
Nice blog. I will keep reading. Please take the time to visit my blog about Free Guitar Lesson