In a move that pleased many Church Street residents, but disappointed those advocating for dedicated bike lanes, South Orange Village Engineer David Battaglia recommended that Church Street in South Orange remain two-way and that “sharrows” be used instead of separated bike lanes on the street.
Village officials said that the final concept for bidding has not yet been decided.
“I think everybody is aware that we have a grant to do paving on Church Street,” Battaglia began at the inaugural meeting of TAPS — the Transportation and Pedestrian Safety Committee — on September 17 at The Baird.
“The grant includes not only Church Street, but also the block of West Third from Church to South Ridgewood.” Battaglia noted, “I was authorized to put together some concepts.”
Detail from Concept 1 (top) and Concept 2 (bottom)
“Concept 1 is roadway sharrows from West Third all the way down to Church Street, and then from Church Street down to South Orange Avenue.” Battaglia described sharrows as “little arrows in the road … that are there really to highlight the presence of bikes. … They kind of just reinforce the actual law.”
Concept 1:
“Obviously bikes and cars are supposed to share the road anyway,” said Battaglia. “Drivers tend to ignore that…. And then at Church and West Third, we would have pedestrian bump outs, which would provide some day lighting for the actual walking pedestrians.”
“Now the differences come in on Church Street. In order for us to do a formal bike lane on Church Street, we do not have enough width for that. What you have right now is, as you all know, a northbound lane and southbound lane and a parking lane. You’re 27 feet wide. I need 10 foot minimum for a lane. I need 10 foot minimum for a two-way bike lane. And I need 7-ft minimum for a parking lane. And we have to have a parking lane,” said Battaglia.
Concept 2:
“So the differences are the parking lane, which is now on the east side of Church, would have to move to the west side. The southbound lane would be closed with a pedestrian bump out as you see there near the NJ Transit driveway, that allows the northbound lane to continue straight through. And it allows the southbound lane to be physically blocked. So we don’t have to be concerned about southbound drivers riding into the parking lane. And then it allows the bike lane to take up the other 10 feet along the east curb on the east side, where, of course, the Greenway connections are…. There would still be bump outs at Church and West Third. They would just move to the other side because the parking is moving to the other side.”
Battaglia concluded, “From a purely engineering perspective, as I said earlier, I’m supposed to look at things in terms of what’s feasible. Both of these designs are feasible according to the regulations. They both improve pedestrian safety. They both cost roughly the same. There’s a little bit more curb work on Church Street with the bike route concept, but we’re replacing all the curbs on Church Street anyway. So it’s not really that big of a deal price wise. There are other things for me to consider though.”
Battaglia noted that he needed to keep in mind other projects happening in the area such as a traffic signal warrant analysis at West Third and South Ridgewood (“they actually just collected the data today and will be giving us a report shortly”), as well as two developments — 23 townhouses approved this summer for the dead end of Church St., as well as 26 units of 100% affordable housing currently under construction on Third, and a stalled negotiation to develop the NJ Transit lot — “which are going to impact traffic, especially along the actual route of the east branch of the Rahway where we would like to have the Greenway. This concept was designed as kind of a temporary replacement to connect the Greenway.”
“Once all of that development is done, returning this back to two way would cost money,” said Battaglia. “Concept 2 also reduces your parking by about six spaces. And parking is a premium on this road. I think, as we all know, Concept 1 improves pedestrian safety, maintains all the existing traffic patterns and parking, and it just serves as a temporary connection for the Greenway until everything else is built. So in being asked to give a recommendation, I’ve actually advised administration that I believe Concept 1 is the best of these things.”
Battaglia said that NJ Dept. of Transportation will review the plans before they go out to bid.
South Orange Council Member Bill Haskins explained that the River Greenway — a bike and pedestrian path roughly following the Rahway River and connecting South Orange and Maplewood from the Orange border to Millburn — has been planned since the early 2000s.
“We completed the first phase of the Greenway in two parts in Meadowland Park between 2008 and 2014, using $4 million in federal, state, and county funds,” said Haskins. “The existing Greenway bike, pedestrian path and bridges run from Meadowbrook Lane past Floods Hill and the South Orange pool to South Orange Avenue.” Haskins reported that the second phase of the project is expected to begin by fall of 2025 or spring of 2026, and will complete a path from Third Street through Waterlands Park to Chyzowych Field near the Maplewood border at Parker Avenue.
“The new bridge will carry the Greenway over the river past the DPW yard and the former pump house.” Phase two was bid out this past summer.
“Phase three of the Greenway will address the gap between South Orange Avenue and Third Street.” Phase four will create a connection to the border with Orange. “We also hope to preserve more land adjacent to the Greenway to protect habitat and water quality,” said Haskins.
All this was to explain that “we don’t come to Church Street on a short amount of thinking,” said Haskins. “We’re thinking and considering bike infrastructure on Church Street as a part of a two-decade long conversation our community’s had, and a two-decade long vision we’ve had about connectivity for bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure through our parks. We don’t take this lightly. It’s about a long-term goal.”
After a review of the development projects in the area by Council Member Olivia Lewis-Chang, more than 90 minutes of questions and comments ensued, with many Church Street residents lauding the recommendation of Concept 1 as making it easier for them to access and exit their homes in an already congested area. Some also questioned if there was demand for the bike lanes.
Conversely, many biking proponents questioned the recommendation, saying that sharrows were a less safe choice for cyclists and pedestrians, and that moving toward a more bike-friendly community would reduce traffic and promote the township’s environmental and Master Plan goals.
Village Green will report that discussion in a follow-up article.
At the end of the meeting, Village Administrator Julie Doran said that the township would seek to award the contract for the project by October 27. She told Village Green that a final decision on which concept to implement had not been made yet but would be determined soon.
