Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
41 user(s) are online (33 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 40

caj11, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 »


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 7:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2095
Offline
If you are planning on driving today, it is traffic Armageddon out there right now. In particular, around JFK and rt. 139. Took me nearly 30 minutes just to get from JSQ to past rt. 139.

Posted on: 5/6 14:22
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 638
Offline
Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
What's more amazing is that it's taking 8 years to replace the Wittpenn Bridge.

I pretty sure there was a plan to build alongside the wittpenn bridge. Instead they chose to rebuild. So after 10 yrs of additional traffic and road closings we will be left with only the same ways in and out of Jersey city. In the end traffic congestion will be as it was before.

Posted on: 4/15 12:37
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/11/9 23:48
From Pre-Historic Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 310
Offline
What's more amazing is that it's taking 8 years to replace the Wittpenn Bridge.

Posted on: 4/14 13:03
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/16 20:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1117
Offline
Quote:
The retaining walls were not part of the original $1 billion Skyway rehabilitation project, said Stephen Schapiro, an NJDOT spokesman.

"If they are not reconstructed now, they would need replacing in a few years, resulting in future closures, detours, and inconvenience to motorists," Schapiro said. "This work is expected to be completed next spring, at which time the Skyway will reopen to two-way traffic."


Well at least this is additional work and not the original project being delayed even more.

Posted on: 4/14 9:57
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway Update ~ It Will Never Get Completed
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 7:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2095
Offline
Quote:

Frinjc wrote:
Too bad, they were making great progress.. but I am not surprised looking at 139, if this is the section just before passing JFK it looks like there is indeed quite a bit of structural consolidation to be done there. The plus side is that thereafter we will be DONE!


When the decking was removed near Central Ave I got a good look at the exposed I-beams. Sunlight was coming through thousands of little pinholes in the steel. That road was in really, really bad shape. I guess years of salt water leaching through the concrete ate away the steel.

Posted on: 4/14 7:37
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway Update ~ It Will Never Get Completed
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/4 12:37
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 456
Offline
Too bad, they were making great progress.. but I am not surprised looking at 139, if this is the section just before passing JFK it looks like there is indeed quite a bit of structural consolidation to be done there. The plus side is that thereafter we will be DONE!

Posted on: 4/13 20:06
Print Top


Pulaski Skyway Update ~ It Will Never Get Completed
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/14 23:56
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 663
Offline

Posted on: 4/13 16:44
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2184
Offline

Full reopening of Pulaski Skyway lanes pushed back a year

By Larry Higgs | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on June 15, 2016 at 7:55 AM, updated June 15, 2016 at 9:14 AM

Reopening all lanes of the Pulaski Skyway to traffic in both directions has been pushed back to next summer, state officials said.

Work is expected to be completed by summer 2017 to finish the last half-mile of bridge deck on the northbound lanes and 3.5 miles on southbound lanes, said Stephen Schapiro, state Department of Transportation spokesman.

That will allow traffic to use the Skyway in both directions for the first time since the northbound lanes were closed for construction in April 2014. Now, it is only open to southbound traffic.

Read more: http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2 ... s_pushed_back_a_year.html


Posted on: 2016/6/15 12:25
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#33
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/5/4 0:58
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 111
Offline
Actually, this is half true. Parts of the northbound side are finished. Right now they have the traffic merging over to the northbound lanes then back to the southbound then once again back to the northbound right before you get off.

It's a dangerous traffic pattern and an accident waiting to happen with how fast people drive on there.

Posted on: 2016/4/6 1:16
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway??
#32
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/11 13:11
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 57
Offline
Hopefully they will fix the 3 major metal plates on the road that are still a lot of wear and tear on the car.

Since there's only 3 now, other drivers either knowingly or unknowingly want to drive over them at ridiculous speeds.

Nothin for nothing, I have been driving the Pulaski from JC to Newark for many a day for the past 3 years.
I have to say the workers are consistently out there, good weather or not. The covered roadway has made a lot
of progress. I hope they are addressing the structural issues of the bridge. I cannot say as I do not know
for sure, but the workers have been out there.

Posted on: 2016/4/2 0:04
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/8/27 18:37
From Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 165
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
How is it that 4 major projects 139 Pulaski skyway njtp interchange 14a and the Bayonne bridge all at the same time? Wonderful planning.
It's pretty nuts, but the 139 was not planned and was started on because chunks of concrete started falling. Really bad timing though, trying to escape this city is tough right now.

Posted on: 2016/4/1 20:37
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway??
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/4 12:37
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 456
Offline
What? There are sections of the span that have no barrier, hard to believe they will reroute traffic there.

Posted on: 2016/4/1 19:49
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway??
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/3/19 11:20
From Scenic McGinley Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 534
Offline
Quote:

mastablasta wrote:
When they started work on the Pulaski Skyway, they said it would take two years. Well, I think that's what they said. Anyway, I drove over it this morning and it doesn't even look like they are even close to finishing the first half let alone start the other lanes. It also looked there there were only about 12 people working on my drive across the entire span around 9:45am. Of those 12, it looked like only three were actually working. Does anyone know when this will be completed?


Just an FYI for all the drivers out there. The Pulaski Skyway will be totally closed this weekend. They finished the side they were rebuilding and are setting up a new traffic pattern to divert traffic to other side of the road.

Posted on: 2016/4/1 16:24
I eat fu*king hipsters and sh*t out fixie bikes.
-J.Parow
Print Top


Pulaski Skyway??
#28
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/5/5 15:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 66
Offline
When they started work on the Pulaski Skyway, they said it would take two years. Well, I think that's what they said. Anyway, I drove over it this morning and it doesn't even look like they are even close to finishing the first half let alone start the other lanes. It also looked there there were only about 12 people working on my drive across the entire span around 9:45am. Of those 12, it looked like only three were actually working. Does anyone know when this will be completed?

Posted on: 2016/4/1 15:40
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/4 12:37
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 456
Offline
Yes I have seen for 139, I drive there pretty much every day. In addition to the bridges by Baldwin, the western end just before the exit to Tonnele and 280, where many structures criss cross each others has not been touched, I am talking especially of the section with that big transversal beam that is supported on concrete that is falling appart. Post the exits yes they have done a good job at reconstructing the steel beams.

What about the major bridges of the skyway? It seems like these are the major components left prior to resurfacing/reopening, the work has been progressing nicely up to that point.

Posted on: 2016/2/23 20:45
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/3/8 19:14
From Erie
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 313
Offline
Do you guys not leave town often?

They've already replaced every single support that spans 139. They knocked out all the crossings except Baldwin and Palisades. Once the remainder of the crossings are completely rebuilt, Baldwin and Palisades will get the treatment.

They're really doing a fantastic job on this work. The schedule is about as close to perfect as a project of this size can get. Last winter was an absolute nightmare as far as construction goes. A few months behind is just fine to me.

Yerp.

Posted on: 2016/2/23 19:57
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4742
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
How is it that 4 major projects 139 Pulaski skyway njtp interchange 14a and the Bayonne bridge all at the same time? Wonderful planning.


Second that. Sometimes it seems like our little peninsula is in lockdown.

Frinjc, I seem to recall eminent plans to close both the baldwin and Palisade bridges for replacement. THAT will be a serious fustercluck. Getting to the Heights from Downtown is bad enough now.

Posted on: 2016/2/23 19:11
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 638
Offline
How is it that 4 major projects 139 Pulaski skyway njtp interchange 14a and the Bayonne bridge all at the same time? Wonderful planning.

Posted on: 2016/2/23 18:40
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/4 12:37
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 456
Offline
Have people noticed how they seem to have worked on the skyway but none of the bridges that support it? It is a similar story with 139, none of the bridges at Baldwin etc have been touched. These are the structurally supporting elements and it does not look like they are doing anything there certainly when on the skyway.

Posted on: 2016/2/23 17:36
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1484
Offline
Remember when this project was first announced and it was going to take four to five years? Two or so years for each direction. Turns out its six years now (and traffic will flow south-bound only for the length of the project):

Pulaski Skyway roadway half done, state will revisit schedule in spring

Aristide Economopoulos | NJ Advance Media, for NJ.com
on February 23, 2016 at 7:40 AM, updated February 23, 2016 at 7:43 AM

State transportation officials say work to install a new bridge deck on the Pulaski Skyway is past the halfway point, although a planned swap of southbound traffic to new pavement on the northbound lanes is delayed.

"The overall project is still on schedule and expected to be completed in 2020," said Stephen Schapiro, an NJDOT spokesman, in response to questions about an NBC News 4 report about delays pushing the project back. "The (bridge deck) project is more than halfway done, as the majority of the northbound side is completed and there has been a lot of work done underneath the southbound lanes."

Installing the new bridge deck is probably the most visible of 10 phases of the project to drivers. It required closing the northbound lanes in April 2014.

That part of the massive $1 billion project is several months behind schedule, which is the planned switch of southbound traffic to the newly installed bridge deck on the northbound lanes. That change was supposed to happen by the end of 2015, to allow crews to replace the bridge deck on the southbound side of the Skyway.

http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2 ... g.html#incart_river_index

Posted on: 2016/2/23 13:01
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2184
Offline
Winner of Pulaski Skyway project failed to disclose investors, competitor alleges

By Jarrett Renshaw/The Star-Ledger
August 06, 2013 at 2:57 PM

TRENTON — The state attorney general’s office has asked the Department of Transportation to review whether a Chinese firm properly disclosed its investors before the agency awarded it a $123 million contract to rebuild portions of the Pulaski Skyway, The Star-Ledger has learned.

The request was prompted by a New Jersey-based competitor — Conti Group — which lost out on the contract and failed to get it overturned after alleging the winning bidder CCA Civil has prohibited ties to Iran’s energy sector.

After losing in administrative and legal hearings, Conti now says CCA Civil should be disqualified for failing to disclose its string of investors in pre-bidding applications.

CCA purposely failed to disclose its investors to avoid revealing its strong ties to the Chinese government and that one of its investors is on a list of companies banned from doing business in New Jersey because of its ties to Iran’s energy sector, Conti argues in July 17 briefing sent to the state attorney general’s office and obtained by The Star-Ledger.

New Jersey is among a growing number of states that ban any company — including its parent companies and subsidiaries — that has financial interests in Iran’s energy sector from public contracts.

"Now that the DOT has been made aware of the misrepresentations and omissions of CCA, in order to ensure that New Jersey law is followed, CCA’s bid must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Conti," the firm’s attorney argues. "This was clearly done to conceal violations of the State Iran Act."

Lee Moore, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, confirmed the office received the letter and referred the matter to the DOT for the agency’s opinion. DOT spokesman Joe Dee declined to comment for this report.

CCA did not respond to phone calls or emails seeking comment, and neither did the firm’s attorney, Michael Guiffre, of Patton Boggs. Officials at Conti Group declined to comment.

A reversal by the DOT would be a stunning blow to CCA, a major contractor in the region. The company, based in Jersey City, is part of a joint venture rebuilding the Alexander Hamilton Bridge between Manhattan and the Bronx, and is one of the bidders vying to rebuild the Central Terminal Building at La Guardia Airport. It worked on New York City’s No. 7 subway line extension and constructed platforms for the train station at the new Yankee Stadium.

State law requires any company awarded a contract to disclose all investors with at least a 10 percent interest. The disclosures apply not only to the bidder but also to its parent companies. In pre-qualification forms, CCA Civil told the DOT it’s a wholly owned subsidiary of CSEC Holding. The firm also disclosed two subsidiaries of the parent holding company.

But in a separate letter to the DOT on June 10, CCA Civil detailed a much more elaborate corporate structure, Conti alleges. CCA said its parent company is wholly owned by another firm, China State Engineering Construction Corporation Ltd., a publicly-traded company whose major stockholder is China State Engineering Construction Corporation.

The company did not disclose those other relationships on the pre-bidding forms, records show.

The recent charge comes after Conti failed to convince the DOT and the attorney general’s office that one of the CCA’s parent companies includes an investor with prohibited financial ties to Iran.

Conti argued that one of the investment partners includes China National Petroleum, a state-owned company that is among 41 firms on the state’s banned list. More broadly, Conti, the runner-up in the bids, also raised concerns about any state-owned Chinese company getting public contracts, given the country’s financial ties to Iran.

In legal briefs and filings to the Department of Transportation, CCA Civil denied claims that it is directly owned and controlled by the Chinese government or that it has any corporate links to companies with investments in Iran. The company argues that Conti is a sore loser that has resorted to "China bashing" to overturn the award.

Lawyers for CCA argue the implications of Conti’s argument is "that each and every business that is directly or indirectly owned by the Chinese government is barred from government contracting." Only Congress can enact such restrictions or empower states to do the same, they said.

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... alleges.html#incart_river

Posted on: 2013/8/6 21:05
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 7:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2095
Offline
Would be nice if the state didn't raid money from the Transportation Trust Fund over the years. It would have been great to replace the Skyway instead of trying to rebuild it.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 12:40
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#19
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/7/25 9:47
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 33
Offline
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation ... udies/pulaski/survey.shtm

take the survey online - hopefully you can address your concerns there.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 11:26
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#18
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/1/9 11:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 56
Offline
The most obvious effect will be increased traffic and congestion on Truck 1&9, Communipaw Blvd, Grant St. It would be nice to hear if Jersey City has a plan to respond to this.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 10:01
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/10/23 14:47
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 858
Offline
Is this going to worsen the congestion downtown from cars using local streets as an alternate route to the Holland Tunnel? It's already pretty hideous when the backup on Marin extends all the way to Grand on some days.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 9:19
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/9/1 10:14
From Downtown - H.P. area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 447
Offline
It's a fair question. I suppose fewer commuters will drive into JC, park and take the PATH since it will be much more of a hassle to get into JC by car to get to the PATH. It might mean more people parking and getting on PATH in Newark or Harrison, or taking NJ Transit from Newark or Secaucus.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 8:24
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#15
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/1/4 13:19
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 29
Offline
Quote:

heights wrote:
Quote:

BeenthereDonethat wrote:
I might be naive in asking this (since I am not a car owner and use public transit) but, how will something like this effect PATH? Better yet, will something like this effect PATH?

Will more commuters choose alternative driving routes (if there are any since I'm hearing the Bayonne bridge is under going work at the same time?)? Or will commuters who drive switch to NJ transit?

Just curious as you could imagine my concern between that and the new high rise towers expected to be built in JSQ. Hopefully this post is relevant to the thread. Thanks.

You mean affect as opposed to effect. As far as the PATH is concerned more people might decide to commute via public transportation including the PATH.


Yes affect. Sorry, it's an early morning for me today. Thanks for your input

Posted on: 2013/1/11 8:11
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/7/13 11:03
From Western Slope
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4302
Offline
Quote:

BeenthereDonethat wrote:
I might be naive in asking this (since I am not a car owner and use public transit) but, how will something like this effect PATH? Better yet, will something like this effect PATH?

Will more commuters choose alternative driving routes (if there are any since I'm hearing the Bayonne bridge is under going work at the same time?)? Or will commuters who drive switch to NJ transit?

Just curious as you could imagine my concern between that and the new high rise towers expected to be built in JSQ. Hopefully this post is relevant to the thread. Thanks.

You mean affect as opposed to effect. As far as the PATH is concerned more people might decide to commute via public transportation including the PATH.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 7:09
Get on your bikes and ride !
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#13
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/1/4 13:19
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 29
Offline
I might be naive in asking this (since I am not a car owner and use public transit) but, how will something like this effect PATH? Better yet, will something like this effect PATH?

Will more commuters choose alternative driving routes (if there are any since I'm hearing the Bayonne bridge is under going work at the same time?)? Or will commuters who drive switch to NJ transit?

Just curious as you could imagine my concern between that and the new high rise towers expected to be built in JSQ. Hopefully this post is relevant to the thread. Thanks.

Posted on: 2013/1/11 7:03
Print Top


Re: Pulaski Skyway to close for 2 years after Super Bowl:
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/9/29 2:09
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 511
Offline


When I had a car, I used to avoid the Pulaski like the plague. I would always see car/truck parts or an accident on it.

The only other bridge that scares me more is the Verrazano. I remember they were doing work on that bridge forever....and there is this nasty, steep turn to get on to it....just crazy!

Posted on: 2013/1/11 0:52
Print Top




(1) 2 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017