Innovation Spotlight: Bicycle-Friendly Resurfacing in Mercer County

Posted on February 2, 2021July 22, 2025

Matthew Zochowski, a Transportation Planner with Mercer County spoke with us about Mercer County’s Bicycle-Friendly Repaving program to make roads safer for bicyclists by creating a network of bike routes throughout the County. He drafted the County’s 2020 Bicycle Master Plan, a sub-element of the Mobility Element of the County Master Plan.

What inspired the bicycle-friendly resurfacing program? What were the considerations when you started this approach?

Going back to where things really started would be with Matt Lawson, the Principal Planner-Transportation for Mercer County, who came to the county in 2005-6, and encouraged the engineering and planning divisions, our regional partners and municipalities, to improve the road network for bicycle use. He helped inspire our bicycle planning efforts and helped move them forward. Along with him, several people working at the County were outdoor enthusiasts who enjoyed hiking and bicycling and wanted other County residents to be able to use the roads and trails in a safe manner. Our County Administration as well as our new County Engineer, George Fallat also placed a larger emphasis on road safety which included bicycles and pedestrians.

In 2009, the Mercer County Bike-Pedestrian Task Force (MCBPTF) was created with the support of Mercer County Executive, Brian M. Hughes, and hosted by the Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association (GMTMA). The MCBPTF consists of municipal representatives designated by town mayors as well as various advocates and residents. The primary purpose of the organization is to help advocate for non-motorized infrastructure throughout Mercer County, including sidewalk improvements, bicycle improvements, intersection improvements, trail improvements, and many others. The group also acts as a forum to coordinate municipal efforts and keep each other informed of activities happening around the County.

The Mercer County Bicycle Master Plan promotes bike-friendly resurfacing in alignment with the County's Complete Streets policy. — The Mercer County Bicycle Master Plan promotes bike-friendly resurfacing in alignment with the County’s Complete Streets policy

When I came to the County in 2017, I took on the projects Matt had been working on and the bike plan was one of the first things I was tasked with advancing. The County had already passed a Complete Streets policy in 2012 to promote safe access and mobility for all users of all transportation modes and since that time, every municipality in Mercer County has adopted their own Complete Streets policy. With a consistent policy across all jurisdictional levels, we knew that Mercer County had a common goal of advancing these types of projects.

Work began on the Bicycle Master Plan in 2017 with the goal of creating a continuous network of bicycle facilities on County-owned roads. At first, we were looking at establishing just a couple of routes, but we realized that the process that we were using could be applied to any number of routes. We took a comprehensive look at the entire 180 centerline miles of the county road network in 50- to 400-foot intervals, and particularly more highly traveled routes which were perfect candidates to incorporate bike lanes to create meaningful connections.

During our planning efforts, we had found out that one of the routes we were looking at was actually going to be repaved and our County Engineer allowed us to advance a concept we developed in-house. As a result of that project and experience, we have shifted to our resurfacing program as the main implementation method for building out our bicycle lane network. This bicycle friendly resurfacing program helps us implement the Complete Streets policy and Bicycle Plan.

We used the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) guidance document Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects to support the effort, and in particular, the argument for cost savings. This piecemeal method of incorporating bike lanes significantly reduces cost of each project and we believe that you have to start somewhere so that years down the line you have a connected network of routes. This was the same problem back in the day when planning boards began requiring sidewalks for developments that were in the middle of nowhere but over years as neighboring properties developed, they created a connected sidewalk network.

What factors did you consider when you identified roads for bicycle improvements?

Factors for analysis of our County Routes is described in great detail in the Mercer County Bicycle Master Plan. We looked at cartway width, environmental constraints, crashes records involving bicycles, network connectivity, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), Annual Average Daily Traffic, truck volumes, existing bus routes, existing and proposed speed limits, bicycle travel demand modeling and 8-80 Design. The idea behind 8-80 design is that if you design a project for an 8- year-old and an 80-year-old, it should work for nearly every person.

To anticipate the cost for implementation, we created a linear foot calculator in MS-Excel that looks at the type of facility and is assigned a code based on the amount of work needed to create an improvement. That code is based on both our striping contract in 2019 as well as general construction costs we tried to localize to New Jersey. When the code is multiplied against a linear foot number, we get a fairly accurate general cost estimate.

Mercer County uses their map of potential bicycle facility types for all County roadways and the Highway Department's repaving schedule to identify projects for each paving season. Click for high resolution map — Mercer County uses their map of potential bicycle facility types for all County roadways and the Highway Department’s repaving schedule to identify projects for each paving season

To create our Excel table and map of the bicycle route analysis, we used a combination of GIS, Google Earth, field visits and Nearmap to define the cartway width, speed limit, pinch points, pedestrian activity, bus routes, and other factors with the goal of recommending a facility for every county road. Now, the plan does not commit the County to a particular projects or final recommendations because priorities and conditions can change. Our plan specifically mentioned that the map shows “Facilities to Be Considered” at the time when we draft concepts for advancement.

What projects have you implemented so far?

The 2019 Pilot Bicycle Paving Program included the implementation of almost seven miles of new bicycle lanes and we learned a lot that year on internal process and coordination with our towns. Our first real project was Scotch Road in Ewing Township which included a road diet with a 4-lane to 2-lane with center turn lane conversion. That project included buffered bike lanes and will eventually connect to a larger 17-mile “Greater Western Bikeway” project to the north and to the proposed bike lanes and extension of Silvia Street by Ewing Township to the south.

Since that time, we also implemented bicycle lanes on Elm Road in Princeton, N Main Street in Hightstown, Ewingville Road in Ewing, Prospect Street in Ewing and East State Street in Hamilton. We’ve also marked out sharrows in a few other locations. At this point, we essentially work with our Highway Department to receive the year’s repaving program and see where we can work to implement projects. Since we will need to have a crew out there to restripe, we look at those projects to determine what our year’s priorities will be.

Restriping on Scotch Road resulted in addition of a bike lane between the through lane and the right turn lane

In 2019, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), the Metropolitan Planning Organization for our region, provided traffic engineering and bike facility planning assistance to help determine the feasibility of bicycle improvements on a segment of County Road 636 which is the main corridor between urban Trenton and suburban Ewing and The College of New Jersey. DVRPC assisted with the segment, between Rt.31 and Olden Avenue, which involved looking at two intersection redesigns.

Will the County take on more projects that are more than just restriping?

The plan includes a variety of routes, some of which require simple striping and others that will require more intensive work such as road widening or intersection redesign that may involve drainage or right-of-way issues for example. We prioritize the roadways that are in need of repaving, and only need additions of epoxy paint or thermoplastic and signage to define the bicycle facility. We continue to plan for more complicated segments and work with our on-call engineering contractors as well as with our in-house staff. In the future, we will likely apply for federal funding for more significant and more complicated projects.

Projects are primarily funded through the County’s capital budget. The County has applied for federal grants for projects as well. In 2018, we received a $2.3 million Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) grant for the Great Western Bikeway, a 17.5 mile route in the northwest part of the county that primarily will follow County Road 546 and run between Delaware and Raritan Canal towpath trails at Rt. 29 and Rt. 1.

Do you work with any municipalities on bicycle infrastructure on municipal roads?

We have assisted a few townships, either with general planning assistance or in design but all municipalities are not ready to take on this approach. We try to reach out to towns about coordinating efforts and we have a close working relationship with several towns. In those situations, we feel that we can build out a complete and connected network relatively easily. Other towns tend to be more closed off to and stick to home rule more than others. Despite that, we can still create a high level of connectivity throughout the County by establishing bicycle infrastructure on County roads which already serve as main connections between our municipalities and adjacent Counties.

Ewingville Road improvements included addition of bicycle lanes in both directions

Are you aware of other counties working on bicycle-friendly resurfacing?

I am not aware of other counties using this approach, or not to the extent that Mercer County is. It seems like Camden and Burlington Counties are not doing as much work with on-road bicycle networks, but are putting a lot of good work into establishing off-road trail networks and multi-use paths. Mercer County is one of eight NJ counties that have a Complete Streets policy, and the policy has really guided the Bicycle Master Plan. The success of the program is in part due to the support of both the Mercer Board of County Commissioners and the local pedestrian and bicycle advocate community.

Do you anticipate that Mercer County will be able to continue this program?

Yes, we will continue to work with the Bicycle Master Plan and coordinate on the paving list from our highway department. We’ll continue to select road segments for each year’s projects, conduct an on-site evaluation for each, and make recommendations to the County Engineer. We plan for 8 or so new repaving projects this year and generally have had 2-5 projects in an average paving season. For our larger projects, we will continue to go after state and federal funding which will help us with larger improvements that go beyond repaving.

We will continue to integrate bicycle facilities into resurfacing projects and make sure bicycle facilities are considered during routine road maintenance, reconstruction, construction, and land development reviews to create a network in alignment with the County’s Complete Streets Policy.

Resources

Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission and Mercer County. (2020). Local Concept Development, North Olden Avenue, New York Avenue to Pennington Road. Project Information Website. Retrieved from: http://creative-mt.com/oldenavenue/

FHWA. (2015). Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects. Online report. Retrieved at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/resurfacing/

Mercer County (2020). 2020 Mercer County Bicycle Plan Element. Website. Retrieved at: http://www.mercercounty.org/departments/planning/2019-bicycle-master-plan

Mercer County. (u.d.) Great Western Bikeway. Website. Retrieved at: http://www.mercercounty.org/departments/planning/rfp-rfq-fair-and-open-process

Innovation Spotlight: NJDOT Local Aid Design Assistance Program

Posted on February 2, 2021July 22, 2025

When cities, counties, and other local public agencies (LPAs) use Federal funds for transportation projects, they must follow all of the applicable Federal laws and regulations attached to the Federal aid. NJDOT, like other state departments of transportation (DOTs), oversees the LPA program and works with agencies to help them use Federal-aid effectively. During Round 2 of the Every Day Counts Program (EDC-2), FHWA promoted innovative strategies for overcoming common challenges with Locally Administered Federal-Aid Projects including practices for enabling “Consultant Services Flexibilities” on local programs and projects.

To aid its LPAs in the delivery of its non-traditional projects programs, the NJDOT Division of Local Aid and Economic Development (Local Aid) established the Local Aid Design Assistance Program. The Design Assistance Program seeks to support LPAs that have received federal grants through the Safe Routes to School and Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TA Set-Aside) programs. The Program provides a pool of pre-qualified engineering design consultants to assist LPAs with plans, specifications and estimates (PS&Es) with the goal of seeing more infrastructure projects implemented. Laine Rankin, Director of Local Aid and Economic Development, and Julie Seaman, Project Management Specialist, described the program.

The NJDOT Local Aid Resource Center website provides links to information on the Design Assistance Program

What are some of the most common challenges local agencies face with the project design process?

LPAs often face lack of staff, lack of funding, and staff turnover, all of which can limit their capacity to take on the federal grant process and can result in delays in infrastructure project planning and implementation. Because New Jersey is a home-rule state, the State has limited jurisdiction over county or local roads. Instead, the municipalities and counties are responsible for infrastructure improvements on their roads. The NJDOT Local Aid Office assists the municipalities in implementing these projects by administering the federal funding for them. Local Aid is ultimately responsible for the spending of these federal dollars.

Safe Routes and TA Set-Aside grant recipients face challenges in understanding and complying with requirements related to federal grant administration. In particular, the requirements of the Brooks Act, also known as Qualifications Based Selection, prove difficult to satisfy in project administration. The Brooks Act details federal requirements for the procurement of professional services of consultants, including:

Issuing a request for proposal or RFP from consultants based on approved written procurement policies and procedures
Solicitation, evaluation, ranking and selection of consultants
Selecting a consultant based on qualifications and experience, not cost
Negotiating a fair and reasonable cost and contract terms with selected consultant
Monitoring the consultants’ work
Evaluating the consultants’ performance
Contract completion

How does the design assistance program work?

Most grant applications that Local Aid receives do not describe projects that are construction-ready. LPAs need assistance to complete designs, and develop engineering plans, specifications, and estimates required to see a project built.

Through the Design Assistance Program, NJDOT procures a pool of design consultants that LPAs can then choose to work with. Once NJDOT and the MPOs have chosen the projects that will be funded for a grant cycle, Local Aid develops a Request for Proposals (RFP) that lists the selected projects and scope for each grant. The NJDOT Office of Procurement solicits a pool of engineering firms that will be able to assist the grant recipients with their particular projects. The firms considered for the pool are typically familiar with requirements associated with developing a set of plans which are compliant to the NJDOT plan and AASHTO standards. Once the consultant pool has been approved by NJDOT management, a letter is sent to all of the grant recipients of that grant cycle informing them of the engineering firms available.

The NJDOT Local Aid Office partners with NJ's three Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the TA Set-Aside project selection process — The NJDOT Local Aid Office partners with NJ’s three Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the TA Set-Aside project selection process

Funding for design assistance comes from the same line of federal funding as the SRTS grant and the TA Set-Aside grants. LPAs receive grant funds for the design program above the amount awarded for the project itself.

For how many years has the design assistance program been operating?

Although this is a pilot program, we initiated the process in April of 2014 and it took about a year and a half to get it up and running following meetings with FHWA, NJDOT Procurement, and the NJDOT Deputy Attorney General. Our office talked to peers in other states including Kentucky, New York, Missouri, among others to understand how other Local Aid offices were handling design assistance for grant recipients and the consultant solicitation process. Design assistance programs were developed for both the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) and the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TA Set-Aside) programs. Design assistance first became available to grant recipients in the 2014 grant round and we solicit grant applications on a two-year cycle, or after a grant solicitation for that particular program has been completed.

TA Set-Aside Grant Webinar explained the purpose and benefits of the Local Aid Design Assistance program

The design assistance program is introduced in our general training session for applicants that describes how to apply for a Safe Routes or TA Set-Aside grant. After the grant awards are announced, information about the program is included in the letter that we send to grant recipients, and a separate informational session is held with grant recipients to discuss the design assistance pool. All grant recipients are eligible to take part in the program; they do not apply for the program and there is no obligation to take part.

Can you say what percentage of grant recipients choose to use the program?

It has taken some time to publicize the program, but awareness among LPAs is growing. In 2016, 19 of 36 TA Set Aside grant recipients, and 12 of 17 SRTS grant recipients elected to use the program. Our 2018 pools are still open; to date, 13 of 25 TA Set Aside grant recipients and 13 of 18 SRTS grant recipients have shown interest in the program. We have approval from FHWA to keep the pool open for a year, with an option to extend up to two years. If an LPA proposes a TA Set-Aside project that involves some specialized work that the engineering firms could not respond to – such as architectural design, then the LPA will not be able to use the design assistance program.

Do NJDOT, the LPA, and the consultants work together through the design assistance process?

Yes. The project application is reviewed and a field meeting is typically scheduled with representatives of the LPA, the consultant engineering firm, the Local Aid regional office, and NJDOT environmental staff. The LPA, NJDOT, and the consultant then work together to develop the scope of work. The consultant prepares a fee proposal and Local Aid develops an independent cost estimate that is used to compare with the consultant’s proposal. NJDOT assists in negotiating the agreement between the LPA and the consultant but the LPA executes an agreement directly with the consultant. NJDOT authorizes federal-aid funds for the design, in excess of the project grant award. The LPA continues to work with the Local Aid District Office through the design process, and NJDOT conducts an environmental review as well. Before the project goes to construction, the plans and specs are submitted to the Local Aid District office for approval in order to ensure a biddable, buildable, project. The LPA pays the consultant directly and then requests reimbursement for the cost from NJDOT.

slide-1

slide-2

slide-3

slide-4

slide-5

What benefits have you seen from the program?

In our experience, what may seem like a simple project, such as installing a sidewalk, can be very complicated. In many cases, particularly for Safe Routes projects, the design costs may exceed the construction costs. We provide design funds for LPAs that choose to procure an engineering firm, but the LPA must comply with the Brooks Act in their procurement process. Some LPAs choose to work with their municipal engineer, but the engineer must be qualified to do the work. Municipal engineers who are involved in the design of these projects are not allowed to also inspect the projects, and these inspection costs increase the overall project cost for the LPAs. For LPAs not using in-house engineering services, the design services procurement process is burdensome.

Through the Local Aid Design Assistance Program, we are distributing more federal funds and seeing more projects advancing than in the past. When we give a grant out, we want folks to build it. LPAs can develop more involved projects. The program results in better compliance with complex state and federal regulations and helps resolve typical engineering issues, such as right-of-way and utilities, that can affect project cost and schedule. LPAs are better prepared for the permitting process.

Do you see the program continuing into the future?

We will be continuing the program. There are always some tweaks to be made but the program is helping local agencies implement projects that improve health and safety throughout the State.

Resources

American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC). (u.d.). The Brooks Act: Federal Government Selection of Architects and Engineers. Public Law 92-582, 92nd Congress, H.R. 12807, October 27, 1972. Legislation on Website. Retrieved from: https://www.acec.org/advocacy/qbs/brooks/

American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC). (u.d.). The Brooks Act: How to use Qualifications Based Selection. Website. Retrieved from: https://www.acec.org/advocacy/qbs/brooks2/

FHWA. (u.d.). EDC-2 Innovations. Website. Retrieved from: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc-2.cfm

NJDOT. (2020). Applying for Federal Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program Funds Webinar TA Set-Aside Grant Webinar Session #2. Online Session. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mxjlb1Zyr0&feature=youtu.be

NJDOT. (2020). Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Design Assistance Program. Presentation. Retrieved from: https://njdotlocalaidrc.com/perch/resources/taset-asidedesignassistanceprogramworkshop-2-28-2020jules-1.pdf

2020 Francis B. Francois Award for Innovation – NJDOT’s Marine Navigation Retroreflective Markers

Posted on January 15, 2021July 22, 2025

NJDOT’s Flexible Marine Navigation Retroreflective Marker

Adoption of new technology and innovative solutions is pivotal to improvements in transportation systems and New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) is adopting innovation in its projects to increase safety and efficiency, and reduce costs. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) recognizes these efforts through its Francis B. Francois Award for Innovation. The award enables the winning state to fund a $10,000 graduate fellowship at a state university of the winner’s choosing. In 2020, 36 state DOTs nominated 79 projects and AASHTO awarded its Francis B. Francois Award to NJDOT for the innovative use of retroreflective markers for marine navigation.

Marine Navigation Retroreflective Markers are an innovative addition to the traditional lights required by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) on bridge fenders. The State of New Jersey owns and maintains 65 bridges that cross navigable waterways. Lighting equipment is used on bridge fenders to aid navigation through the channels underneath the bridges. Any failure of these lights creates a safety hazard and requires emergency repairs. Upon detection of a light failure, a work order is issued by NJDOT for an emergency crew, incurring costs due to lost productivity and overtime pay. In addition, the USCG may impose a penalty of $25,000 per day per incident. The genius of the innovation is in the installation of retroreflective panels, typically used on highways, which are themselves inexpensive. As a backup for the navigation lighting, these panels maintain safety for boaters, and help to ensure the safety of repair crews as work can now be carried out during daylight hours rather than immediately — irrespective of daylight or harsh weather conditions. This cost-effective solution makes navigation safer and reduces the burden of maintenance. The USCG has approved NJDOT’s Marine Navigation Retroreflective Markers as a backup to the navigation lighting system.

The Marine Navigation Retroreflective Markers can easily be adopted by other NJ agencies and other state DOTs as backup lighting for navigating waterways under bridges. Watch the video shared at the AASHTO awards to learn more about NJDOT’s Marine Navigation Retroreflective Markers.

Use of the marine navigation retroreflective markers can aid navigation

Use of the marine navigation retroreflective markers on bridges as backup navigation lighting

Use of the marine navigation retroreflective markers beneath bridges for better guiding boats

Research to Implementation: Environmental Impacts of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement

Posted on January 11, 2021July 22, 2025

This Research to Implementation video presents an example of NJDOT-sponsored research and the effect such research has in addressing transportation-related issues within the State.

Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) is material gathered through the milling and removal of existing pavement surfaces. In New Jersey, reuse of this material is restricted to inclusion in new asphalt pavements. NJDOT’s Bureau of Research supported a study that explored the environmental impacts associated with reuse of RAP in unbound applications.

The video summarizes the research and the resulting recommendations that have influenced legislation and helped frame discussions among various stakeholders concerning the beneficial uses of RAP.

NJ Invites You to Participate in Mileage-Based User Fee Study

Posted on November 5, 2020December 7, 2020

New Jersey’s Department of Transportation is participating in a pilot study exploring a potential future transportation funding solution for the roads, bridges and public transit in New Jersey. The pilot study will examine whether mileage-based user fees (MBUF) offer a feasible alternative to the fuel tax, which is seeing declining revenues as more drivers shift to more efficient and electric vehicles.

The pilot study is taking place through a partnership of the New Jersey Department of Transportation and The Eastern Transportation Coalition. NJDOT is neutral about whether MBUF is the ultimate answer, but recognizes the importance of further studying MBUF in real-world pilots as a means to finding a realistic and effective solution to our long-term funding challenge.

NJDOT is seeking participants from the transportation community to help test drive new technology needed for a MBUF system and offer their insights. While the pilot study is currently underway, there is still time to enroll in the program.

Enrollment is easy and only requires a couple of steps to begin:

Step One: Gather the following information:

VIN (Vehicle Identification Number) – Need help finding your VIN? Click here for possible locations.
Current odometer reading
License plate number

Step Two: Visit the Coalition’s MBUF website to begin enrollment.

Within a week of enrollment, you’ll receive a device that turns your car into a “smart car.” Just plug it in, drive for four months, and provide feedback via quick online surveys.

The Eastern Transportation Coalition has already conducted pilot studies for trucks and passenger vehicles. Findings from these pilot studies and other technical memoranda addressing such topics as administration and compliance, privacy, interoperability, equity and fairness can be found here.

For more information please download the attached flyer, visit the project website or contact mbuf@tetcoalition.org.

The Eastern Transportation Coalition, formerly known as the I-95 Corridor Coalition, is a partnership of 17 states and the District of Columbia focused on connecting for solutions to support the economic engine of the U.S. The Coalition represents 40% of the U.S. population and GDP.

The Coalition is neutral regarding MBUF as the ultimate solution for transportation funding but wants to ensure that the voices of citizens along the Eastern Seaboard are part of the national discussion. Results from studies across the country will help policymakers decide on next steps.

22nd Annual NJDOT Research Showcase

Posted on November 2, 2020April 30, 2025

The 22nd Annual NJDOT Research Showcase was an opportunity for the New Jersey transportation community to learn about the broad scope of academic research initiatives underway and share technology transfer activities being conducted by institutions of higher education partners and their associates. The annual event serves as a showcase to present the ongoing initiatives and benefits of the NJDOT Research program. This event was also the first Research Showcase conducted by webinar with sessions held from 9am-12pm on October 27, 28, and 29, 2020.

Each day's Research Showcase Program included presentations by university researchers, NJ agency representatives, and engineers offering their perspectives and fielding questions on topics including responses to the challenge of weather and climate change, emerging technologies such as smart mobility, and the effects of Covid-19 on transportation networks. These presentations were followed by poster sessions presenting research of students attending New Jersey’s universities and colleges.

DAY 1

On Day 1, the NJDOT Commissioner of Transportation, Diane Gutierrez-Scaccetti, provided opening remarks along with the Federal Highway Administration's Assistant Division Administrator in New Jersey, Valeriya Remezova. Both speakers noted NJDOT’s steps taken and plans for the future to promote resiliency.

A recording of the Day 1 presentations can be found here and to the right.

The keynote speaker was Gerald E. “Jerry” Buckwalter, Chief Operating and Strategy Officer of the American Society of Civil Engineers who presented the “ASCE Future World Vision.” Mr. Buckwalter described the ASCE role in imagining the future of cities, incorporating rapid developments in technology, alternative energy, climate change, materials, policy and funding, and demographics and urbanism. The project created five interactive scenarios of multi-dimensional city and neighborhood systems to adapt to changes over the next fifty years. These visions are intended to engage youth in thinking about engineering, spark public interest, provide a visual starting point for discussion, encourage cross-disciplinary collaboration and create a common language, and to foster innovation among university students.

Keynote presentation by Gerald E. Buckwalter, Chief Operating and Strategy Officer, American Society of Civil Engineers. Click for pdf

Amanda Gendek, Manager, NJDOT Bureau of Research announced several awards given in recognition of research, innovation and implementation efforts. Below is a listing of the award winners presented at this year's showcase:

2020 Outstanding University Student in Transportation Research Award – Laura Marques Soarces, Rutgers University (Energy Harvesting on New Jersey Highways)
2020 NJDOT Research Implementation Award – Yusuf Mehta, Rowan University (Environmental Impacts of Recycled Asphalt Pavement)
2020 Best Poster Award – Thales Couto Braguim, Rutgers University (Load Rating, Analysis, and Monitoring of the Sagging Fascias Girder of I-287 Bridge over US202/206) LINK
2020 NJDOT Build a Better Mousetrap Award – Scott Ainsley and Mark Crago (Anti-Jacknife Device)

The Build a Better a Mousetrap Award was given to Scott Ainsley and Mark Crago in NJDOT’s Operations Training Unit for their Anti-Jacknife Device. They developed this early warning device to prevent jackknifing and damage to trucks and trailers during new employee CDL training. The device increases cost savings by eliminating the need for repairs, and improves efficiency during new employee training (see videos below).

DAY 2 PRESENTATIONS

On Day 2, research presentations focused on resiliency themes, the economic impacts of Covid-19 on maritime trade and port commerce, and emerging smart mobility technologies.

A recording of the Day 2 presentations can be found here and to the right.

Boile&Theofanis_The-Effect-of COVID-19-on-the-Port-Industry

The Effect of Covid-19 on the Port Industry – Global Trends & Regional Effects, Sotiris Theofanis, PhD and Maria Boile, PhD (Rutgers University) LINK

Enhancing Resilience of Bridges through Real-time Deformation Monitoring using UWB Technology Enhanced by Machine Learning, Yiming Liu (Stevens Institute of Technology) LINK

Carnegie_Coming-Soon-NJDOT-Flood-Risk-Visualization-Tool

Coming Soon: NJDOT Flood Risk Visualization Tool, Jon Carnegie, AICP, PP (Rutgers University) LINK

Rosenblatt_NJ-Climate-Change-Resilience-Strategy

New Jersey’s Climate Change Resilience Strategy, Dave Rosenblatt, Assistant Commissioner (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection) LINK

New Brunswick Innovation Hub Smart Mobility Testing Ground Phase 1 Planning, Peter J. Jin, PhD and Ali Maher, PhD (Rutgers University) LINK

Improving Resilience, Safety, and Service Life of the Pulaski Skyway, Ruben Gajer, PE (Arora and Associates, PC) LINK

DAY 3 PRESENTATIONS

On Day 3, research presentations covered several topics, including transportation-related health stressors relationship on Covid-19 and energy, durability, mobility and safety topics in transportation.

A recording of the Day 3 presentations can be found here and to the right.

Exploring the Impacts of VMT induced PM2.5 on the Rate of COVID-19 Infection, Yeganeh Hayeri, PhD and Hojat Behrooz (Stevens Institute of Technology) LINK

Energy Harvesting from Roadways and Bridges: Opportunities and Challenges, Hao Wang, PhD (Rutgers University)

Behavior of Concrete Barriers for Bridges in New Jersey, Anil Agrawal, PhD (The City College of New York) LINK

Accelerating Mobility for All: Analysis of Focus Group Feedback from Persons with Disabilities Following Autonomous Vehicle Rides, Cecilia Feeley, PhD and Andrea Lubin (Rutgers University) LINK

Development and Evaluation of a Realtime Truck Detection Method Using Deep Learning Based Object Recognition Techniques for Truck Parking Information System, Joyoung Lee, PhD (New Jersey Institute of Technology)

Automated Analysis of Surrogate Safety Measures and Non-compliance Behavior of all Road Users at an Intersection, Deep Patel and Mohammad Jalayer, Ph.D (Rowan University) LINK

POSTER SESSIONS

Each day students and researchers at New Jersey’s colleges and universities presented posters describing their methods and findings on ongoing and recently completed research and responded to questions by attendees. (Click on images for links to posters.)

Optimized Speed Profiles for Sustainable Train Operation with Regenerative Braking – Leon Allen and Steven Chien, NJIT

Poster- Thales Cuoto Braguim - Load Rating

Load Rating, Analysis, and Monitoring of the Sagging Fascia Girder of I-287 Bridge over US202/206 – Thales Couto Braguim, Rutgers University

Process-Based Modeling for Inlet Management – Jon K. Miller, Laura Lemke, Matthew S. Jannsen, Stevens Institute of Technology

Poster- Mohammed Abed - Utilization of Hybrid

Control of Shrinkage Cracks in Bridge Decks by Using Hybrid Fiber Reinforced High Performance Concrete – Mina Habib

Poster- Chan Yang- Load Rating and Load Posting

Load Rating/Posting Policy for SHVs and EVs and Reliability Assessment of SHV Load Models – Chan Yang, Peng Lou, Chaekuk Na, Dongjian Gao, Rutgers University

Effects of Thixotropic UHPC on Interfacial Properties as an Overlay – Jiang Du, Weina Meng, Adi Abu-obeidah, Hani Nassef, Stevens Institute of Technology

Poster-Kathleen Stavole, Jack Cannon, and Luke Dragon - Implementation of Porous Concrete

Implementation of Porous Concrete in Sidewalks in New Jersey – Kathleen Stavole, Jack Cannon, Luke Dragon, Hardik Yagnik, Husam Najm, Rutgers University

Climate Change Impact on Pavement Overlay Performance with Adaptation Strategies – Xiaodan Chen, Rutgers University

Poster - Zhuang Zhuo - Thermally and Mechanically

Thermally and Mechanically Balanced Structural Design of Insulated Pavements for Cold Region Applications – Zhuang Zhuo, Ayman Ali, Cheng Zhu, Yusuf Mehta, Wade Lein, Christopher DeCarlo, Zhaoxing Xie, Rowan University & the US Army Corps of Engineers

The 22th Annual NJDOT Research Showcase was organized and sponsored by the NJDOT Bureau of Research in partnership with the New Jersey Local Technical Assistance Program (NJLTAP) at Rutgers Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT) and co-sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration.

NJDOT’s Traffic Incident Management Training Program

Posted on October 19, 2020July 22, 2025

NJDOT’s Traffic Incident Management Program offers training and resources to improve the coordinated response to traffic incidents. Source: NJTIM website

NJDOT’s New Jersey’s Traffic Incident Management (TIM) program consists of a planned and coordinated multi-disciplinary process to detect, respond to, and clear traffic incidents so that traffic flow may be restored as safely and quickly as possible after an incident. According to the 2015 State of New Jersey Traffic Incident Management Strategic Plan, about half of all traffic congestion is caused by temporary, one-time occurrences, such as crashes, disabled vehicles, spilled cargo, highway maintenance and reconstruction, adverse weather, and planned special events. These occurrences reduce roadway capacity, disrupt the normal operation of the transportation system, increase the risk of secondary crashes, and result in lost time and productivity, increased cost of goods and services, negative impacts on air quality and the environment, and reduced quality of life and motorist satisfaction.

Training classes include incident resolution exercises. Source: NJTIM website

By reducing the duration and impact of traffic incidents, effective traffic incident management practices improve the safety of crash victims, other motorists, and emergency responders. TIM practices are designed to reduce the time to detect, respond to, investigate, and safely clear the incident, to safely manage personnel and equipment at the site, provide timely and accurate information to the public, and to manage affected traffic until normal conditions are restored. Stakeholders in the Traffic Incident Management program include federal, state, and local agencies and private sector partners including emergency medical services (EMS), fire and rescue, law enforcement, transportation agencies, medical examiners and coroners, hazardous materials contractors, towing and recovery, emergency management, public safety communications, and traffic information media.

The FHWA’s Every Day Counts (EDC) program, in cooperation with the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2), offered the first national traffic incident management process and training program as an innovation under EDC-2 in 2013-2014. First offered in 2010, NJDOT’s classes in TIM predated the FHWA EDC initiative. The NJ TIM Responder Training provides interactive, hands-on incident resolution exercises to help participants learn to coordinate incident response activities and optimize operations in the field. The training supports development of a unified practice among all stakeholders. NJDOT has continued to train in TIM during the pandemic and, as of September 1, 2020, the program has trained 29,798 incident responders.

NJDOT and the ITS Resource Center at NJIT have updated the NJTIM website. Source: NJTIM website

In alignment with the 2015 Strategic Plan, NJDOT and the ITS Resource Center at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, developed the NJ TIM website in 2016 to provide support to the TIM program. Recently, they have modernized the website through the addition of new content, including videos and other resources such as case studies and training recaps. A schedule of virtual trainings, and registration for individual and group training, are available. The website provides links to the Strategic Plan and Safety Guidelines for Emergency Responders, as well as contact information for all federal, state, county, and local law enforcement agencies operating in the state.

Video screenshot of hazard display message received by motorists. Source: NJDOT

Through EDC-4, FHWA promoted the use of data to improve traffic incident management. NJDOT is increasingly looking to technology to improve safety at incident sites. A pilot study looked at the effectiveness of using connected vehicle technology on 32 safety service vehicles to alert drivers to the presence of safety service patrol (SSP) workers via the mobile navigation app Waze. NJDOT established a Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) Integration Working Group to develop a plan for CAD integration among New Jersey agencies and other organizations. Using the OpenReach system, NJDOT has implemented the FHWA key performance measures: roadway clearance time; incident clearance time; and number of secondary crashes. Traffic incident management data sharing between the NJDOT and law enforcement systems is expected to decrease incident response times, properly capture the incident timeline, and improve the traffic incident management process. More information on these efforts can be found at the NJDOT Technology Transfer website.

Lunchtime Tech Talk! WEBINAR: Analysis of Local Bus Markets

Posted on October 8, 2020July 22, 2025

On October 7, 2020, NJDOT hosted a Lunchtime Tech Talk! Webinar on the Analysis of Local Bus Markets with Deva Deka, Ph.D., Assistant Director, Research, at Rutgers – Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center, and Susan O’Donnell, Senior Director, Business Analysis and Market Research at NJ TRANSIT. Dr. Deka began the presentation with a general description of the NJ TRANSIT system that operates approximately 250 bus routes throughout New Jersey. Bus riders constitute almost 60 percent of all riders using NJ TRANSIT services, including commuter rail and light rail. For many New Jersey residents, those buses are essential for meeting almost all daily travel needs.

Dr. Deka provided a profile of the demographics of bus users, including household income, race, and vehicle ownership.

For the past five years, the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center of Rutgers University has been conducting onboard surveys of bus riders in different parts of New Jersey for projects funded by the NJDOT Bureau of Research and sponsored by NJ TRANSIT. Dr. Deka, the Principal Investigator for these survey studies, presented the bus survey methodology, and key findings. He described the questionnaire design, survey scheduling, training of surveyors, and the process of data collection, and the post-survey process that has involved data cleaning and weighting, and analysis. Over the five years, the project has generated clean data for over 15,000 riders.

Dr. Deka gave an overview profile of bus rider characteristics and trip characteristics found from the survey research. The survey showed that riders are predominantly Hispanic and/or African-American, lower-income, from households with no car or one car, and dependent on the bus system. The data support the essentiality of bus services for zero-car households and inform analyses of the broader impacts of bus services such as decreases in traffic delays and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

In the second half of the presentation, Ms. O’Donnell described the use of the survey data by NJ TRANSIT for planning purposes. The data supports travel demand modeling which replicates existing conditions and predicts future conditions to inform roadway projects and transit projects. This information is shared with New Jersey’s three Metropolitan Planning Organizations, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. Current data is required in transit grant applications, and contributes to studies related to access to transit, corridors, intermodal systems, and transit oriented development.

To fulfill the agency’s obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, NJ TRANSIT uses the data to perform an equity analysis to evaluate the effect of fare changes or service changes on low-income populations and minority populations, and to provide data to help in developing a language assistance plan for Limited English Proficiency populations.

In addition, NJ TRANSIT uses the data when working with advertisers that want to target their message efficiently to specific demographic groups.

The agency’s Newark Bus System Redesign Project will use the data collected in fall 2019 to align and modify bus routes and explore service to new areas. This is the first, and largest, of multiple systems to be evaluated to bring the agency’s entire bus system up to date.

In closing, Ms. O’Donnell presented an update on bus use during the pandemic based on surveys given during April and June. The data shows how important the bus system has been to essential workers.

Following the presentation, the Dr. Deka and Ms. O’Donnell responded to questions asked through the chat feature:

Q. What was the number of questions asked on the survey and what incentives were offered?
A. The survey comprised about 30 questions. Incentives helped increase interest in the surveys and respondents had a chance of winning 1 of 5 $100 gift cards.

Q. Did you consider using IPads rather than paper-based intercept surveys?
A. Dr. Deka noted that they did consider them, but use of IPads limits the number of surveys that can be collected at one time. The surveyor has to stay with the individual using the IPad, and cannot approach other riders at the same time, limiting the efficiency of the survey-taker. Dr. Deka also referenced a Mineta Transportation Institute report that compared data quality and costs for different approaches to on-board transit passenger surveys that found efficiencies with the paper-intercept approach for bus users. Ms.O’Donnell noted that this technology might work at a station or on a platform because a number of surveyors can be located in the same place but is difficult to use on a crowded bus. During the pandemic, IPads probably could not be used due to safety concerns with touching and handling equipment.

Q. What are typical variables used to weight the data to the total ridership?
A. The sample is weighted by direction of the bus, time of day, and the run. A trip is from an origin to the destination and all trips combined is a run. They do not weight the sample by demographic variables or geography because they do not have solid information on the total transit user “universe” population related to these variables.

Q. Did you compare rider survey results by types of service area?
A. No. While there are some suburban routes if you segment or categorize by origins, such as Morristown, almost all routes are generally very urban. It would be possible to use the data to compare by counties.

Q. What is the delay imposed by traffic congestion on buses?
A. Traffic impacts have been an issue that has been looked at by traffic engineers at Rutgers – CAIT some years ago. They collected data traffic signal timings at intersections that the bus traveled through and applied VISSIM for simulations. Dr. Deka said that he could connect anyone interested with the detailed technical methods that the researchers used on that traffic impact study, if they’re interested.

A recording of the webinar is also available.

Federal Highway Administration Releases Third EDC-5 Progress Report

Posted on October 1, 2020October 1, 2020

FHWA has released the latest report card for Every Day Counts (EDC)-5 innovation deployment status among state Departments of Transportation. The goal of the EDC program is rapid technology transfer and accelerated deployment of innovation across the country. The program seeks to develop a culture of innovation through shared best practices, data, specifications, case studies, and success stories. The report card depicts the implementation stage (Not Implementing, Development, Demonstration, Assessment, Institutionalized) for each innovation by state. Detailed information on NJDOT’s work on these Innovative Initiatives can be found here.

FHWA recently announced the next two-year round of innovations, EDC-6. Work on these innovations will begin in January 2021. Information on the seven innovations promoted in this round can be found here.

A-GaME: Avoiding Unforeseen Costs on Transportation Projects Through Early Detection of Subterranean Obstacles

Posted on September 18, 2020May 1, 2025

The Federal Highway Administration is encouraging State Departments of Transportation to utilize A-GaME, one of the agency’s Every Day Counts (EDC-5) innovations, to mitigate risks and improve reliability of geotechnical site characterization with proven, effective exploration methods and practices.

NJDOT used a drone to safely photograph the full extent of the soil erosion

This article is a summary of an interview with New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) employees with expertise in engineering and geology from Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology. The interview was held with Kim Sharp (Supervising Engineer, Geotechnical Engineering), John Jamerson (Project Engineer, Engineering Geology), and Amanda McElwain (Principal Engineer, Engineering Geology) to discuss how NJDOT utilizes A-GaME methods for its projects and the benefits these methods provide.

Q: What is A-GaME?

A-GaME is an acronym for “Advanced Geotechnical Methods of Exploration” that encompasses a relatively new set of techniques for subsurface exploration that provides a more complete understanding of an area’s geotechnical and geological properties. In short, these techniques allow engineers to “see” what’s underground during a project’s design phase.

A-GaME techniques include the following processes:

Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)
Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
Electrical Resistivity
Measurements While Drilling
Seismic Methods (Surface Waves, Refraction, Tomography, Reflection)
Optical/Acoustic Televiewers

Tools of the trade: sledgehammer, striking plate, and sensors are used to measure seismic vibrations through soil

Transportation projects typically use soil borings to collect soil samples, which are then tested in labs to determine the soil properties (e.g., water content, water depth, soil type, etc.) that will inform project design and construction. A-GaME techniques supplement soil borings and can more accurately identify obstructions, bedrock, and other soil conditions that could cause construction delays. They can also detect more subtle changes in soil conditions than conventional bore holes or penetration tests.

Q: Which of these methods has NJDOT used? Have they been successful?

Each A-GaME method yields benefits. The key is to find the right method for each project. NJDOT has utilized A-GaME methods in the preliminary design and design phases of several projects. In these projects, the results of the exploration have benefited project design and construction. Some of the more prominent examples of NJDOT’s use of A-GaME include:

Seismic Piezocone and P-S seismic logging techniques for the Pulaski Skyway seismic retrofitting of foundations. Consultants used these techniques in their site-specific seismic response analyses to derive shear wave velocity correlations and discover the various layers and depths of fill, organics, sands, clays, glacial till, and bedrock composition. This information allowed the engineers to determine how to retrofit each foundation to withstand a seismic event.
Mapping talus deposits – that is, collected rockfall piles – over bedrock on Route 80.
Microgravity surveys have been used in mine investigations. Northern New Jersey has several abandoned mines, and these surveys have provided safer and more complete methods to map and assess the structural integrity of these mines and inform remedial strategies.
Seismic methods were also used on another project near the Delaware Water Basin to measure the depth of talus deposits. Seismic activity was monitored from the road vibrations and the waves were measured at various points around the deposit to determine the locations of voids and the pile’s overall depth.
Mapping of rock joints for bridge foundation design along Route 4. Mapping the locations of the fractures in the rock allowed the design team to place the bridge foundations in structurally sound locations based on the competency of the rock mass. The process assisted in determining the long-term stability of the rock mass, the rippability (ease of excavation) and constructability of the mass, possible excavation angles, and the potential need for additional support.
Bathymetry Survey has been used in waterways upstream and downstream of structures on navigable waterways to provide river bottom elevation cross sections. This technique was used on the Pulaski Skyway project to reveal images of debris that had fallen off ships into the Hackensack River and could present issues during construction of the proposed foundation seismic retrofitting. The information saves time and money in the construction phase by alerting contractors to obstructions that will need to be removed.
Geophysical explorations have been used for finding shallow surface and river bottom debris, utility installations, and mapping existing bridge footing configurations underwater.
LiDAR survey has been used for site investigation on rock faces on a few projects during design.
Optical and acoustic tele-viewers have been used some down hole in soil borings to characterization of rock and any open voids.
Single Station Passive Seismic Survey (SSPSS) has been used to differentiate weathered rock from bedrock using ambient vibrations. Determining the interface between weathered rock and competent bedrock is essential, whether it is for rock slope stability, excavation concerns (mechanical or blasting), or foundations. SSPSS helped determine if the top layer was comprised of weathered rock, or if the top layer was comprised of loose boulders with lots of air-space in between.
Drones have been used in emergency situations to investigate large slope failures and to inform design on rockfall mitigation projects. On I-287, a drone equipped with a high-resolution camera was able to take photographs and videos revealing a broken drainage pipe that was contributing to erosion that required immediate remediation. This was safer and more cost effective than utilizing a team of workers to investigate. On I-280 and I-287, drones have also been used for rockface mapping and early site characterization as a design tool.

The source driver impacts the source, like a hammer striking a nail, and generates a wave. The pressure waves and seismic waves are recorded by the geophones as they travel through the fluid and soil walls.

Q: Who determines which method to use, and who does the exploration?

Our office, in collaboration with design consulting firms, determines the most appropriate new technology methods for each project. The right method is largely determined by the type of project and its location. For example, projects that cross rivers may rely on sonar, LiDAR, or tomography to assess the conditions under the water and on the river’s slopes. On the other hand, a project in the mountains may require seismic methods of subsurface exploration because the steep slopes and rocky terrain make conventional testing impossible.

NJDOT often utilizes these methods during a project’s design phase to be proactive in reducing the risks and costs associated with underground soil conditions during construction. Some of these methods are also useful in emergency situations.

NJDOT sources A-GaME work to a small group of contractors that have knowledge on how to use the highly specialized and expensive equipment required to perform the tests, and the skilled, specialty trained personnel to conduct the tests and interpret the data. NJDOT and local governments rely upon private industry contractors to perform these specialized services; in fact, the geophysical firms themselves may not own the specialty equipment (e.g., seismographs, etc.), but will rent it out as needed due to the high costs of ownership. When we develop the boring program, the prime design consultant firm will often contract with a specialty geophysical firm. Sometimes the geophysical firm will be hired by the drilling contractor.

Q: You just said that these methods can be expensive, but isn’t an important benefit of these methods to save money?

A-GaME techniques tend to have a higher up-front cost, but these methods save money over the life of a project through risk reduction. When designers, DOTs, and contractors have a better understanding of the issues that could arise due to subterranean conditions (e.g., bedrock, air voids, old storage containers, abandoned mines), the project can account for these conditions rather than discovering them during the construction phase.

In the design phase, A-GaME methods can provide information to ensure that foundations are not overdesigned, or are appropriate for rocky terrain, and can improve constructability over the life of the project – which can deliver cost savings. Overall, these techniques reduce costs associated with construction delays, change orders, and litigation.

In some environments, projects on mountainous terrain for example, the cost of soil borings can be very high to mobilize equipment, so supplementing borings with geophysical techniques brings the project cost down.

The information about soil known by traditional boring methods. Source: Minnesota DOT

Q: What knowledge, skills, and abilities are needed to advance the use of A-GaME at NJDOT?

Delivering the specialized equipment, skills, and education needed for A-GaME are currently outside the capabilities and day-to-day responsibilities of NJDOT’s Geotechnical Engineering Department. Testing methods are complicated, and the resulting data often require the analyst to have a PhD in Geology. The degree of specialization warrants the need for outsourcing the work to specialty contractors who would regularly perform these functions and hone their expertise. Engineers entering the profession would not necessarily have had sufficient exposure to these techniques at the undergraduate level.

However, NJDOT staff have been going on-site when the specialty contractors perform work on NJDOT projects to learn more about these methods and climb the learning curve. When DOT staff have more knowledge about the methods, the odds of advancing their use in future projects increases.

Q: What are some challenges to A-GaME’s deployment?

From an engineering perspective, all of the design firms need to become aware that there are lots of methodologies available to analyze and obtain soil and rock properties for better, and sometimes more efficient and cost-effective, designs of our foundations and rock slopes. We work with firms of varying capacities including some less experienced firms with little awareness of the methods. There are also some firms that would be interested in implementing these services on select projects, but until recently were not sure that NJDOT was open to their use, such as for rock work.

Information provided by ERI imaging is much more thorough. Source: Minnesota DOT

NJDOT project management teams also can be resistant to spending the extra up-front money for this type of testing and analysis. Soil boring drilling contractors do not want to work in tandem with geophysical firms because they have to wait for the firms to get out there and complete their work; for example, there are peripheral costs and scheduling uncertainties related to use of optical or acoustical televiewer work. The drilling contractors do not want to be idle while the geophysical work is being performed. They want reliability as to when work will be completed so they can quickly move on to the next job. So, we have found that fewer drilling contractors may actually bid on the job if they have to work in tandem or accommodate the geophysical firm services. This can drive the bid costs up.

Q: What are the next steps for A-GaME?

NJDOT and most other DOTs are still learning about A-GaME methods and their applications. The next step for NJDOT’s adoption of A-GaME is to continue to spread knowledge of these methods and encourage their use to supplement traditional boring techniques.

NJDOT’s Bridges and Structures Design Manual is being updated and, as part of the revision process, Geophysical Testing has been added to the new Sections 25 and 26. While FHWA still must review these and other revisions to the Manual before it is made available to the public, the inclusion of A-GaME in the manual should eventually increase the awareness and use of these innovative methods among consultants. New innovative techniques are being added in the subsurface contract language as well.

Knowing where you will encounter bedrock is very helpful for excavation or drilling. You cannot get a complete picture such as this from bore samples. Courtesy of Jeff Reid, Hager-Richter Geoscience, Inc.

NJDOT is encouraging designers to learn more about these methods and to seek approval for their use when designing NJDOT projects. NJDOT’s geotechnical team anticipates that, with familiarity, project managers will support additional funding for A-GaME during the design phase and use within the industry will grow.

Q: Is there any other information you would like us to know about implementing the A-GaME?

These methodologies provide a wealth of information regarding soil and rock that soil borings and visual observations alone cannot provide us. These methodologies better assist NJDOT in subsurface exploration for our highway structures and rockfall mitigation projects, as well as aid in determining pre-construction constructability issues on our heavily traveled waterways.

Resources

FHWA. (n.d.) Advanced Geotechnical Methods in Exploration (A-GaME). Retrieved from: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/geotech_methods.cfm

Kelley V.C. (1987) Joints and fractures. In: Structural Geology and Tectonics. Encyclopedia of Earth Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31080-0_56

NJDOT (n.d.). Innovative Initiative: What are Advanced Geotechnical Methods in Exploration? Retrieved from: https://www.njdottechtransfer.net/advanced-geotechnical-exploration-methods/

Palmström A. (2001). Measurement and Characterization of Rock Mass Jointing, Chapter 2, In-Situ Characterization of Rocks. Editors: V.M. Sharma and K.R. Saxen. Retrieved from: http://rockmass.net/ap/69_Palmstrom_on_Jointing_measurements.pdf

United States Geological Survey (n.d.) Geologic Units Containing Talus. Retrieved from: https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc-lith.php?code=1.5.5