I know it's not an official designation but I remember seeing it designated this way on a paper map years ago. I think this is one of the few occasions when I would make an exception to my strong love of END signage. I think NJDOT should even put the standard "Welcome to New Jersey" and "Entering Lower Twp" signage up; you entered NJ by car.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=38.940051,-74.988899&spn=0.099471,0.234318&t=h&z=13
Quote from: _Simon on February 20, 2013, 12:53:35 AM
I know it's not an official designation but I remember seeing it designated this way on a paper map years ago. I think this is one of the few occasions when I would make an exception to my strong love of END signage. I think NJDOT should even put the standard "Welcome to New Jersey" and "Entering Lower Twp" signage up; you entered NJ by car.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=38.940051,-74.988899&spn=0.099471,0.234318&t=h&z=13
U.S. 9 is posted in Delaware, (and posted E-W) between the U.S. 13 at Laurel and the ferry.
Right, but the ferry parking lot and the boat aren't officially US-9. The designation ends short of the ferry on both sides.
Quote from: _Simon on February 20, 2013, 01:05:08 AM
Right, but the ferry parking lot and the boat aren't officially US-9. The designation ends short of the ferry on both sides.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/USRN_page_001_to_054.pdf shows no gap.
Quote from: NE2 on February 20, 2013, 01:54:35 AM
Quote from: _Simon on February 20, 2013, 01:05:08 AM
Right, but the ferry parking lot and the boat aren't officially US-9. The designation ends short of the ferry on both sides.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/USRN_page_001_to_054.pdf shows no gap.
The mileage to the state line isn't included in any of the figures in that document or in real life. SLD shows the route ending at the water's edge with no reference to a ferry being available.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/00000009__-.pdf
The NJ SLDs are for reference purposes only, and may not necessarily reflect the actual routing. The SLD is only showing the road as it exists in NJ.
US 9 is indeed a multi-state road, that goes from Delaware thru New Jersey into New York State. Ferries are considered part of the route.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2013, 08:21:12 AM
Ferries are considered part of the route.
Any other examples of this?
Is that Lake Champlain crossing heading towards Vermont?
Quote from: NE2 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:56 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2013, 08:21:12 AM
Ferries are considered part of the route.
Any other examples of this?
NY 114?
CT 148 and CT 160, although those ferries have ceased operation due to budget cuts, leaving both routes discontinuous.
NC 12
Any number of rural northern routes in Canada.
The case of US 9 is complicated by the fact that the ferry crosses a state line, and the ferry is not operated by either DOT, so neither state has reason to internally consider the route to continue past the dock.
US 10 is officially considered to be two separate routes, although the ferry connecting them across Lake Michigan is seasonal.
EDIT: To answer Kevin's question, NY 114 travels from Greenport down to East Hampton, via Shelter Island which is only accessible by ferry on either end. I drove it this past weekend. There is an error US 114 shield on Shelter Island.
Quote from: MrDisco99 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2013, 08:21:12 AM
Ferries are considered part of the route.
Any other examples of this?
Highway E18 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E18) between Stockholm or Kapellskär, Sweden and Ã...bo/Turku or NÃ¥dendal/Naantali, Finland.
Highway E20 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E20) between Stockholm and Tallinn, Estonia. There's also a "missing" E20 ferry connection between Kingston upon Hull, England and Esbjerg, Denmark.
Highway E39 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E39) between Hirtshals, Denmark and Kristiansand, Norway. E39 also has
at least 5 domestic ferries along its route in coastal Norway (and had more in the past, but several have been replaced by subsea tunnels.
Highway E65 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E65) between Ystad, Sweden and Świnoujście, Poland.
The entire Washington ferry system?
Quote from: Duke87 on February 20, 2013, 06:49:31 PM
The case of US 9 is complicated by the fact that the ferry crosses a state line, and the ferry is not operated by either DOT, so neither state has reason to internally consider the route to continue past the dock.
But the Cape May-Lewes Ferry
is operated by a public authority, the Delaware River & Bay Authority (DRBA) (http://www.drba.net/).
US 322 used to be a ferry crossing the Delaware, before the Comm Barry Bridge was built.
I'm sure ferries crossing state lines, with the route number considered part of the ferry's routing, used to be a frequent occurrence in the early - mid 1900's.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 21, 2013, 09:23:08 AM
US 322 used to be a ferry crossing the Delaware, before the Comm Barry Bridge was built.
I'm sure ferries crossing state lines, with the route number considered part of the ferry's routing, used to be a frequent occurrence in the early - mid 1900's.
White's Ferry (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=dickerson+md&hl=en&ll=39.154757,-77.51893&spn=0.019069,0.025964&sll=39.154657,-77.519531&sspn=0.009534,0.012982&t=h&gl=us&hnear=Dickerson,+Montgomery,+Maryland&z=15) between Dickerson, Maryland and Leesburg Virginia can probably be considered an interstate ferry, though the entire Potomac River belongs to Maryland (up to the high-water mark on the Virginia shoreline).
On the Virginia side, Va. 655 (White's Ferry Road), a secondary system road, leads from the ferry landing to U.S.15.
On the Maryland side, un-numbered River Road (gravel surface) and un-numbered White's Ferry Road lead to the landing. Both are secondary roads maintained by Montgomery County.
Quote from: corco on February 20, 2013, 08:50:33 PM
The entire Washington ferry system?
And the entire Alaska Marine Highway (http://www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/) system?
And the entire North Carolina Department of Transportation Ferry Division (http://www.ncdot.gov/ferry/)?
wait, the Alaska Marines are numbered routes?
Why is there no bridge there? Couldn't there be a ponchotrain type bridge with a rise in the middle?
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 20, 2013, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 20, 2013, 06:49:31 PM
The case of US 9 is complicated by the fact that the ferry crosses a state line, and the ferry is not operated by either DOT, so neither state has reason to internally consider the route to continue past the dock.
But the Cape May-Lewes Ferry is operated by a public authority, the Delaware River & Bay Authority (DRBA) (http://www.drba.net/).
Right and the DRBA operates separately from either DOT.
Quote from: texaskdog on July 06, 2015, 03:01:23 PM
Why is there no bridge there? Couldn't there be a ponchotrain type bridge with a rise in the middle?
Certainly. Or like the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel. But the DRBA has always figured the traffic flow doesn't justify the expense.
If they did build it though, they would come.
Quote from: texaskdog on July 06, 2015, 03:01:23 PM
Why is there no bridge there? Couldn't there be a ponchotrain type bridge with a rise in the middle?
A. Money.
B. You'll end up with the same situation at Norfolk Roads-national security; the Navy certainly wouldn't go for it and most likely you'd have a problem with the new Panamax ships, which would then force you into a bridge-tunnel system which takes you back to:
C. Money.
I always belived they'd do it in my lifetime, now it one of those things I don't expect to see built ever.
well, US 13 has one
Part of the reason, as Jeff suggests, is that the traffic volumes would not support such a bridge or bridge/tunnel. This is also related to the road network. The CBBT works because it would be a hellacious detour around to the Bay Bridge and backtrack in order to reach over half of the Delmarva. It's also a significant mileage and time savings for Hampton Roads travelers who are heading to Wilmington or points north. During the several years I was stationed in Norfolk, I calculated the savings at 80 miles and 45 minutes, and that was BEFORE factoring I-64/I-95/DC/Baltimore traffic delays.
The savings for North Jersey travelers of a Cape May-Lewes fixed span are much less...I'm estimating about a 20 mile savings over taking DE 1/Del Mem Bridge/NJ Turnpike. The savings for trucks would be basically nil, as they're forced off the Parkway at Exit 105.
But a bigger reason for no bridge is physical/bathymetric in nature, and the reason why comparisons to the CBBT don't work well. The CBBT was workable because, except at the channels, most of the water is 40ft or less in depth. The problem with a Cape May-Lewes crossing is that you have about a 2.5 mile swath where the water is 60ft or deeper, reaching as much as 130ft in a few spots. The shallowest deep spot I can find in potential bridge or tunnel area is still close to 100ft. What this means is you have a significant length of potential bridge that would have to have very deep bridge piers, and a tunnel that would have to reach twice as deep as the CBBT. Both of these would seriously skyrocket the cost of a bridge/tunnel...to the point where it's just not cost-effective.
Quote from: MrDisco99 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2013, 08:21:12 AM
Ferries are considered part of the route.
Any other examples of this?
Well, most of the ones I was thinking of are already taken, but how about AK 7?
Quote from: Duke87 on February 20, 2013, 06:49:31 PM
Quote from: NE2 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:56 PM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on February 20, 2013, 06:24:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2013, 08:21:12 AM
Ferries are considered part of the route.
Any other examples of this?
NY 114?
CT 148 and CT 160, although those ferries have ceased operation due to budget cuts, leaving both routes discontinuous.
NC 12
Any number of rural northern routes in Canada.
The case of US 9 is complicated by the fact that the ferry crosses a state line, and the ferry is not operated by either DOT, so neither state has reason to internally consider the route to continue past the dock.
US 10 is officially considered to be two separate routes, although the ferry connecting them across Lake Michigan is seasonal.
EDIT: To answer Kevin's question, NY 114 travels from Greenport down to East Hampton, via Shelter Island which is only accessible by ferry on either end. I drove it this past weekend. There is an error US 114 shield on Shelter Island.
The Rocky Hill ferry (CT 160) is closed for the season?
Quote from: Cjzani on July 06, 2015, 09:37:34 PM
The Rocky Hill ferry (CT 160) is closed for the season?
Actually, I was referring to the state's plan in the summer of 2011 to end service on both ferries permanently as a way to save money from the budget. It turns out, after massive outcry, the state backpedaled on this decision and ferry service never actually stopped. Though I was not aware this 11th hour save had occurred at the time I wrote the post you quoted.
The Rocky Hill Ferry is so lightly used as to be functionally speaking unnecessary. And I'd even argue it ought to be discontinued permanently if not for the fact that it has been operating since 1655 and thus is the oldest continually operating ferry service in the United States. That distinction makes it worth preserving for historical reasons.
Quote from: froggie on July 06, 2015, 07:55:16 PM
Part of the reason, as Jeff suggests, is that the traffic volumes would not support such a bridge or bridge/tunnel. This is also related to the road network. The CBBT works because it would be a hellacious detour around to the Bay Bridge and backtrack in order to reach over half of the Delmarva. It's also a significant mileage and time savings for Hampton Roads travelers who are heading to Wilmington or points north. During the several years I was stationed in Norfolk, I calculated the savings at 80 miles and 45 minutes, and that was BEFORE factoring I-64/I-95/DC/Baltimore traffic delays.
The savings for North Jersey travelers of a Cape May-Lewes fixed span are much less...I'm estimating about a 20 mile savings over taking DE 1/Del Mem Bridge/NJ Turnpike. The savings for trucks would be basically nil, as they're forced off the Parkway at Exit 105.
But a bigger reason for no bridge is physical/bathymetric in nature, and the reason why comparisons to the CBBT don't work well. The CBBT was workable because, except at the channels, most of the water is 40ft or less in depth. The problem with a Cape May-Lewes crossing is that you have about a 2.5 mile swath where the water is 60ft or deeper, reaching as much as 130ft in a few spots. The shallowest deep spot I can find in potential bridge or tunnel area is still close to 100ft. What this means is you have a significant length of potential bridge that would have to have very deep bridge piers, and a tunnel that would have to reach twice as deep as the CBBT. Both of these would seriously skyrocket the cost of a bridge/tunnel...to the point where it's just not cost-effective.
I'm glad you mentioned the physical aspect, I wasn't completely sure of what the depth of Delaware Bay was at that particular place and I didn't want to go around trying to find topo maps of it. Yes, that would probably kill it (not that it isn't attainable, but the engineering and construction costs would far outweigh the utility unless you were doing it as a 'national pride' project and even then in our age of 'funny money' probably wouldn't fly).
Quote from: froggie on July 06, 2015, 07:55:16 PM
Part of the reason, as Jeff suggests, is that the traffic volumes would not support such a bridge or bridge/tunnel. This is also related to the road network. The CBBT works because it would be a hellacious detour around to the Bay Bridge and backtrack in order to reach over half of the Delmarva. It's also a significant mileage and time savings for Hampton Roads travelers who are heading to Wilmington or points north. During the several years I was stationed in Norfolk, I calculated the savings at 80 miles and 45 minutes, and that was BEFORE factoring I-64/I-95/DC/Baltimore traffic delays.
The savings for North Jersey travelers of a Cape May-Lewes fixed span are much less...I'm estimating about a 20 mile savings over taking DE 1/Del Mem Bridge/NJ Turnpike. The savings for trucks would be basically nil, as they're forced off the Parkway at Exit 105.
But a bigger reason for no bridge is physical/bathymetric in nature, and the reason why comparisons to the CBBT don't work well. The CBBT was workable because, except at the channels, most of the water is 40ft or less in depth. The problem with a Cape May-Lewes crossing is that you have about a 2.5 mile swath where the water is 60ft or deeper, reaching as much as 130ft in a few spots. The shallowest deep spot I can find in potential bridge or tunnel area is still close to 100ft. What this means is you have a significant length of potential bridge that would have to have very deep bridge piers, and a tunnel that would have to reach twice as deep as the CBBT. Both of these would seriously skyrocket the cost of a bridge/tunnel...to the point where it's just not cost-effective.
Tunnel under the shallow parts, and then build a floating bridge on the deep parts?
Quote from: _Simon on February 20, 2013, 04:11:46 AM
Quote from: NE2 on February 20, 2013, 01:54:35 AM
Quote from: _Simon on February 20, 2013, 01:05:08 AM
Right, but the ferry parking lot and the boat aren't officially US-9. The designation ends short of the ferry on both sides.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/USRN_page_001_to_054.pdf shows no gap.
The mileage to the state line isn't included in any of the figures in that document or in real life. SLD shows the route ending at the water's edge with no reference to a ferry being available.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/00000009__-.pdf
Because that's where milepost 0 is. But that shouldn't be an indication that the ferry isn't part of US 9. That's just where the pavement starts and NJDOT maintenance starts, so that's where the zero point is.
Washington State Ferries are unambiguously part of their respective numbered routes, but the water mileage isn't included in the highway's mileposts.
Quote from: Alps on July 07, 2015, 06:23:53 PM
Tunnel under the shallow parts, and then build a floating bridge on the deep parts?
Presumably at least one of the deep parts is a shipping lane. Would it be feasible to design a floating bridge with enough clearance to allow post-panamax ships under?
Also, with the aforementioned national security concern, you'd more likely see the opposite - tunnel under the shipping lanes, bridge over the shallower sections.
Meanwhile, I'm not an expert on floating bridges, but it does occur to me that the most famous example (WA 520) crosses a relatively small and highly sheltered body of water. I imagine Delaware Bay regularly sees much larger waves than Lake Washington ever does. This certainly would have implications for the stability of a floating structure.
Another reason this can't be compared to the CBBT: the CBBT was built back when building infrastructure was easy. It would be much less likely to be built today. Also note that when the bridge parts were widened, the tunnel parts were not.
Quote from: Alps on July 07, 2015, 06:23:53 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 06, 2015, 07:55:16 PM
Part of the reason, as Jeff suggests, is that the traffic volumes would not support such a bridge or bridge/tunnel. This is also related to the road network. The CBBT works because it would be a hellacious detour around to the Bay Bridge and backtrack in order to reach over half of the Delmarva. It's also a significant mileage and time savings for Hampton Roads travelers who are heading to Wilmington or points north. During the several years I was stationed in Norfolk, I calculated the savings at 80 miles and 45 minutes, and that was BEFORE factoring I-64/I-95/DC/Baltimore traffic delays.
The savings for North Jersey travelers of a Cape May-Lewes fixed span are much less...I'm estimating about a 20 mile savings over taking DE 1/Del Mem Bridge/NJ Turnpike. The savings for trucks would be basically nil, as they're forced off the Parkway at Exit 105.
But a bigger reason for no bridge is physical/bathymetric in nature, and the reason why comparisons to the CBBT don't work well. The CBBT was workable because, except at the channels, most of the water is 40ft or less in depth. The problem with a Cape May-Lewes crossing is that you have about a 2.5 mile swath where the water is 60ft or deeper, reaching as much as 130ft in a few spots. The shallowest deep spot I can find in potential bridge or tunnel area is still close to 100ft. What this means is you have a significant length of potential bridge that would have to have very deep bridge piers, and a tunnel that would have to reach twice as deep as the CBBT. Both of these would seriously skyrocket the cost of a bridge/tunnel...to the point where it's just not cost-effective.
Tunnel under the shallow parts, and then build a floating bridge on the deep parts?
It's in tidal waters, so a floating bridge would be subjected to tides and waves, which can reach several feet high on calm days.
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2015, 09:15:08 PM
Another reason this can't be compared to the CBBT: the CBBT was built back when building infrastructure was easy. It would be much less likely to be built today. Also note that when the bridge parts were widened, the tunnel parts were not.
They are looking into adding the additional tunnels because traffic and safety demands warrant it. Those two tunnels will probably cost more than what was spent on the entire original bridge/tunnel structure.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 07, 2015, 11:39:26 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 07, 2015, 06:23:53 PM
Tunnel under the shallow parts, and then build a floating bridge on the deep parts?
It's in tidal waters, so a floating bridge would be subjected to tides and waves, which can reach several feet high on calm days.
I happen to enjoy roller coasters.
Also, no, the ferry is not part of US 9. Otherwise NJDOT mileage would start at N.NN with a note that the remaining mileage is on the ferry.
Quote from: Alps on July 08, 2015, 06:39:34 PM
Also, no, the ferry is not part of US 9. Otherwise NJDOT mileage would start at N.NN with a note that the remaining mileage is on the ferry.
Sort of seems to be a tedious split of hairs to me. I take it you'd expect a mile 0 marker in the middle of the bay at the border. :D
It's U.S.
Route 9. The only way to follow the route is to take the ferry. Therefore, the ferry is an integral part of the route.
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2015, 07:06:15 PM
It's U.S. Route 9. The only way to follow the route is to take the ferry. Therefore, the ferry is an integral part of the route.
Using that logic, US-2 exists in Lake Huron and Canada.
I think the ferry is part of U.S. 9. It's not part of DelDOT's U.S. 9 or NJDOT's U.S. 9, but it is part of AASHTO's U.S. 9, and they're the agency that designates U.S. routes.
Saying the ferry is not U.S. 9 is like saying U.S. 85 doesn't exist in New Mexico. Yeah, there's an argument to be made that it doesn't because it's not signed or acknowledged by NMDOT but really it does because the people that are in charge of designating U.S. routes say it does.
U.S. 2 is discontinuous according to the agency that designates US routes, so that's a different ball of wax.
Quote from: GaryV on July 08, 2015, 07:10:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2015, 07:06:15 PM
It's U.S. Route 9. The only way to follow the route is to take the ferry. Therefore, the ferry is an integral part of the route.
Using that logic, US-2 exists in Lake Huron and Canada.
Nope. I'm making the rules here. East US 2 clearly ends at Rouses Point. West US 2 clearly ends in St. Ignace. There's no formal connection between the two.
Quote from: corco on February 21, 2013, 09:40:20 AM
wait, the Alaska Marines are numbered routes?
At least one of them got a Federal Aid Primary route number. However, the markers on the few highways Alaska numbers all use numbers different from their FAP numbers.
AK 7's four segments are linked by ferries. However, the ferries in the network serve different destinations, though the two biggest ferries make stops at all four. The other complicating thing is that for three of the segments, the ferry terminal is somewhere in the middle, so you can't take a ferry to the end of a segment, drive the segment, and catch another ferry at the other end. That makes it hard to view AK 7's segments and its connecting ferries as part of a single route, which might be why nobody there treats it as such. (I suspect the segments were numbered with the intention of building bridges connecting them end-to-end, though that fantasy quickly withered away.)
Quote from: texaskdog on July 06, 2015, 04:18:17 PM
well, US 13 has one
Where? I've driven that recently end-to-end, IIRC there isn't one.
Quote from: Duke87 on February 20, 2013, 06:49:31 PM
US 10 is officially considered to be two separate routes, although the ferry connecting them across Lake Michigan is seasonal.
AASHTO just approved the addition of the S.S. Badger ferry route to U.S. 10. If the Michigan and Wisconsin, etc. segments are still "officially considered" separate, they may not be for long.
Based on that precedent, I think adding the Cape May ferry across Delaware Bay to U.S. 9 would be a great idea. Just one that hasn't happened yet, AFAIK.
Quote from: oscar on July 08, 2015, 07:29:41 PM
Based on that precedent, I think adding the Cape May ferry across Delaware Bay to U.S. 9 would be a great idea. Just one that hasn't happened yet, AFAIK.
The 1989 log shows a gap in US 10 but not US 9.
Quote from: NE2 on July 08, 2015, 08:30:56 PM
Quote from: oscar on July 08, 2015, 07:29:41 PM
Based on that precedent, I think adding the Cape May ferry across Delaware Bay to U.S. 9 would be a great idea. Just one that hasn't happened yet, AFAIK.
The 1989 log shows a gap in US 10 but not US 9.
And I thought I read somewhere today that the ferry is now officially recognized as part of US 10.
Two posts up, Dum Dum.
The Delaware Bay is subject to worse weather than any floating bridge is designed for. Hurricanes for one, tides for another. the outflow of the entire Delaware river as well. The Salt would corrode the bridge, along with any chemicals that flow down from the cities along the river.
Why not build one up river a bit? Near Hopewell Township NJ.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on July 10, 2015, 07:46:24 PM
Why not build one up river a bit? Near Hopewell Township NJ.
Washington Crossed Here.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on July 10, 2015, 07:46:24 PM
The Delaware Bay is subject to worse weather than any floating bridge is designed for. Hurricanes for one, tides for another. the outflow of the entire Delaware river as well. The Salt would corrode the bridge, along with any chemicals that flow down from the cities along the river.
Why not build one up river a bit? Near Hopewell Township NJ.
Because no highways would lead to it, the nearby land is quite a bit higher than the river, and there's already several major river crossings close to that area already.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on July 10, 2015, 07:46:24 PM
The Delaware Bay is subject to worse weather than any floating bridge is designed for. Hurricanes for one, tides for another. the outflow of the entire Delaware river as well. The Salt would corrode the bridge, along with any chemicals that flow down from the cities along the river.
Why not build one up river a bit? Near Hopewell Township NJ.
Hopewell is also close to 100 miles north of Cape May and Lewes.
Possibly referring to the other Hopewell Township, the one in Cumberland County (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopewell_Township,_Cumberland_County,_New_Jersey) that doesn't border the bay?
Quote from: Mr. Matté on July 11, 2015, 07:10:17 AM
Possibly referring to the other Hopewell Township, the one in Cumberland County (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopewell_Township,_Cumberland_County,_New_Jersey) that doesn't border the bay?
It's still tidal water, it's still a large area to cross for a floating bridge, the Delaware Memorial Bridge isn't that far away, and there's still no roads to lead to it. Besides, many people on the GSP and Rt. 9 are traveling to or near shore & beach destinations in both NJ and DE. A new bridge 30 miles away doesn't do anything for that traffic.
Quote from: NE2 on July 08, 2015, 09:05:49 PM
Two posts up, Dum Dum.
No, Randy Jr. I mean a real news story somewhere, not a member post here.