AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Due to a threat of legal action were forced to take the forum offline to expunge a number of posts from a banned user. We are working to resolve the database situation and restore the forum to full functionality as soon as possible.

Author Topic: New Jersey Turnpike  (Read 1154440 times)

famartin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1101
  • Location: Trenton NJ area
  • Last Login: August 29, 2023, 03:45:42 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4800 on: March 09, 2023, 11:01:28 AM »

Quote
The authority plans to add two lanes in each direction on the 36.5 miles between Exit 1 and Exit 4 at Route 73 in Mount Laurel. Engineering work for the areas around Exits 2 and 3 is scheduled to begin in 2024, with construction there getting underway in 2028, officials said.

Don’t tell someone  :wow:

The typical news getting minor details (although I’d argue 6 vs. 8 lanes is a big difference) wrong aside, the overall premise of the article is they would like Turnpike Authority to construct a new interchange / direct link at NJ-42 / I-76, to divert thru traffic away from the current Exit 3.

Wouldn't we all like that...
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14376
  • Age: 48
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 06:29:30 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4801 on: March 09, 2023, 01:16:04 PM »

Quote
The authority plans to add two lanes in each direction on the 36.5 miles between Exit 1 and Exit 4 at Route 73 in Mount Laurel. Engineering work for the areas around Exits 2 and 3 is scheduled to begin in 2024, with construction there getting underway in 2028, officials said.

Don’t tell someone  :wow:

The typical news getting minor details (although I’d argue 6 vs. 8 lanes is a big difference) wrong aside, the overall premise of the article is they would like Turnpike Authority to construct a new interchange / direct link at NJ-42 / I-76, to divert thru traffic away from the current Exit 3.

Wouldn't we all like that...

Based on how that article was starting, I thought the paper scouted out the few people that don't want any highway expansion ever. Overall, the project has been generally supported by most who care about it, which doesn't happen often in these parts.

For the most part most people don't care about it since the Turnpike just cuts thru the area with good access crossing it, but without the congestion from interchanges every few miles. Once the NJTA starts to widen it, people are going to be temporarily irritated when the overpasses they use daily will be closed or narrowed while they are reconstructed. Some people are going to have to deal with the inconvenience of the construction directly who live close by. And some who live in developments that back up to the Turnpike will be more personally affected; most will probably get a sound barrier, and deal with the eventual plusses and minuses of them.

As for a new interchange, that may be getting some political attention this time since 168, 42, 55 and 295 traffic is getting unbearable, and the Turnpike at least has an ear and eye open on the idea. But while it will improve life for some, there are others that may possibly live in the shadows of a new interchange so they'll be against it.  If anything, they are in a no-win situation...those specific people currently have to battle the traffic on 168 due to the current interchange, and will be in favor for a new interchange until they realize how close it'll be to their homes, and realize they don't want that either.
Logged

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1464
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: Today at 06:50:01 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4802 on: March 09, 2023, 05:24:00 PM »

I’ve always wondered why there was never an interchange between the Turnpike and NJ-42. Kind of like there not being an interchange between I-95 and the PA Turnpike until 2018.
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14376
  • Age: 48
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 06:29:30 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4803 on: March 09, 2023, 09:43:37 PM »

I’ve always wondered why there was never an interchange between the Turnpike and NJ-42. Kind of like there not being an interchange between I-95 and the PA Turnpike until 2018.

When Interstates were originally built, they couldn't connect directly to a tolled highway.  Also, in this case, NJ 168 was close enough to NJ 42 that they figured it didn't matter all that much, and the original Turnpike generally had exits many miles away from each other. 

Even looking at closely spaced exits now, such as Exits 10 and 11, Exit 10 was originally where Exit 11 is now, and didn't connect to the Garden State Parkway, which didn't exist at the time.
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14078
  • Age: 32
  • Location: The 518
  • Last Login: Today at 09:23:43 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4804 on: March 09, 2023, 09:52:19 PM »

Even looking at closely spaced exits now, such as Exits 10 and 11, Exit 10 was originally where Exit 11 is now, and didn't connect to the Garden State Parkway, which didn't exist at the time.
Interesting... where was the original exit 11?
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2037
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 09:59:09 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4805 on: March 09, 2023, 09:56:07 PM »

I keep hearing this excuse from Pennsylvania and New Jersey that toll roads could not be connected to free Interstates. But yet New York State had no trouble building interchanges between the NY Thruway and various free Interstates.

I think the real issue was that Federal funding couldn't be used for such interchanges, but they could be built by the toll authorities using their own funding which is probably what New York did. I'm guessing that NJTA and PTC wouldn't use their own funding to connect to free Interstates only because they wanted drivers to stay on their toll road instead of using free roads. And who suffered for that? The general public who couldn't conveniently transit from the Pennsy Pike to I-95 or from the NJT to NJ 42/A.C. Expwy.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2037
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 09:59:09 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4806 on: March 09, 2023, 10:05:14 PM »

Even looking at closely spaced exits now, such as Exits 10 and 11, Exit 10 was originally where Exit 11 is now, and didn't connect to the Garden State Parkway, which didn't exist at the time.
Interesting... where was the original exit 11?

Exit 11 was roughly where it is now but it only connected the Turnpike to US 9 and was named Woodbridge - The Amboys. Exit 10 was a limited interchange between the Turnpike and the G.S. Parkway. The Parkway was built a few years after the NJT. I don't know if originally there was no Exit 10 or if it connected to some other road.

When the dual NJT roadways were built in the early 1970's, Interchanges 10 and 11 were combined into the new larger Interchange 11 that exists today. And when I-287 was built around the same time, its interchange with the Turnpike became the new Exit 10.

All very cool highway history!
« Last Edit: March 09, 2023, 10:13:23 PM by SignBridge »
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14376
  • Age: 48
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 06:29:30 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4807 on: March 09, 2023, 10:15:31 PM »

Even looking at closely spaced exits now, such as Exits 10 and 11, Exit 10 was originally where Exit 11 is now, and didn't connect to the Garden State Parkway, which didn't exist at the time.
Interesting... where was the original exit 11?

So this shows the exit numbers were fairly close.  https://external-preview.redd.it/pqkFowWtBy-PH0TcviA5tJpGSMrn5Qv9asmsTwXBp5E.jpg?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=b67dbd8fafbf998325687784e44734657c5eb92e

But it's a bit confusing and doesn't truly match up with history.  Someone claimed this was 1950 per the handwritten date at the top.  Yet the Turnpike opened in November 1951. 

It shows the Garden State Parkway was Exit 10...but there is no road at Exit 10.  The original exit connected with CR 514 (at least what is now known as CR 514).  The Garden State Parkway started construction in 1952 and opened in 1954.  So there's a bit of confusion as to how the first few years of the Turnpike actually existed.

I'm guessing that NJTA and PTC wouldn't use their own funding to connect to free Interstates only because they wanted drivers to stay on their toll road instead of using free roads. And who suffered for that? The general public who couldn't conveniently transit from the Pennsy Pike to I-95 or from the NJT to NJ 42/A.C. Expwy.

In this theory, the distance between NJ 42 and NJ 168 is about 2 miles.  At roughly 1 cent per mile back in the 1950's and 60's, the Turnpike was missing out on 2 cents per traveler going south, and gaining 2 cents per traveler going north.  The AC Expressway opened in 1964.

The original routing of I-95 in NJ would've followed I-287 for a few miles before branching off.  The NJ Turnpike created the interchange to allow for this movement to occur.

For the PA Turnpike travelers going towards the East would get off several miles sooner onto Rt. 1 to connect to I-95.  Travelers coming from NJ would get off on US 13.

Also in this theory, why would the PA Turnpike not only make a large connection with I-76, but continue the designation of I-76 off the Turnpike towards Philly?  Why wouldn't the entire PA Turnpike just remain I-76 to keep traffic on the Turnpike?

For these reasons, the theory that the Turnpikes did everything they could to keep motorists on their roads really doesn't make much sense. 
Logged

Mr. Matté

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 927
  • Age: 33
  • Location: NJTP - Exit '08
  • Last Login: Today at 02:33:35 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4808 on: March 09, 2023, 10:27:40 PM »

That part of the Parkway was the state-constructed part dating back to the late 1940s/1950 (the part between 129 and Vauxhall Road that can never be tolled) so the original interchange 10 should have connected the two freeways at the time of its opening.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2037
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 09:59:09 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4809 on: March 09, 2023, 10:28:05 PM »

Interesting counterpoint J&N. So you're saying the reason PTC didn't build an I-95 interchange was because they felt the existing routes  (US 1 and US 13) were adequate for making that connection.

So did PTC fund the interchange with I-76 west of Philadelphia? If they did, then yes that blows away my theory. 
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14376
  • Age: 48
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 06:29:30 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4810 on: March 09, 2023, 11:02:50 PM »

Interesting counterpoint J&N. So you're saying the reason PTC didn't build an I-95 interchange was because they felt the existing routes  (US 1 and US 13) were adequate for making that connection.

So did PTC fund the interchange with I-76 west of Philadelphia? If they did, then yes that blows away my theory. 

All of PA is odd...they didn't make connections with the Turnpike at most points, and still don't in some cases, but others they did, such as I-176 towards Reading.

Not sure how the whole history of I-76 came about. While many focus on wanting 76 going thru Philly because of the significance of history, which is false, a lot less is made of why it didn't just continue on its east-west track into NJ, and the Schuykill Expressway simply be an x76.

And not sure about the funding of such.
Logged

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13355
  • Last Login: Today at 09:12:55 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4811 on: March 09, 2023, 11:16:40 PM »

I keep hearing this excuse from Pennsylvania and New Jersey that toll roads could not be connected to free Interstates. But yet New York State had no trouble building interchanges between the NY Thruway and various free Interstates.

I think the real issue was that Federal funding couldn't be used for such interchanges, but they could be built by the toll authorities using their own funding which is probably what New York did. I'm guessing that NJTA and PTC wouldn't use their own funding to connect to free Interstates only because they wanted drivers to stay on their toll road instead of using free roads. And who suffered for that? The general public who couldn't conveniently transit from the Pennsy Pike to I-95 or from the NJT to NJ 42/A.C. Expwy.
See how I-87 and I-84 didn't have a direct connection until a few years ago...
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

elsmere241

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 667
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Wilmington, DE
  • Last Login: Today at 09:38:00 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4812 on: March 10, 2023, 09:31:25 AM »

All of PA is odd...they didn't make connections with the Turnpike at most points, and still don't in some cases, but others they did, such as I-176 towards Reading.

Not sure how the whole history of I-76 came about. While many focus on wanting 76 going thru Philly because of the significance of history, which is false, a lot less is made of why it didn't just continue on its east-west track into NJ, and the Schuykill Expressway simply be an x76.

And not sure about the funding of such.

I remember when I-176 ended at a stop sign.

I also remember that until the early 1980s, 76 followed the stub that would become the Vine Street Expressway, and 676 followed the Schyulkill over the Walt Whitman Bridge.  The exit numbers in 1983 still reflected this.
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15755
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 09:32:42 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4813 on: March 10, 2023, 09:41:15 AM »

All of PA is odd...they didn't make connections with the Turnpike at most points, and still don't in some cases, but others they did, such as I-176 towards Reading.

....

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't I-176 disconnected from the Turnpike until sometime in the 1990s?
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

elsmere241

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 667
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Wilmington, DE
  • Last Login: Today at 09:38:00 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4814 on: March 10, 2023, 09:46:10 AM »

All of PA is odd...they didn't make connections with the Turnpike at most points, and still don't in some cases, but others they did, such as I-176 towards Reading.

....

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't I-176 disconnected from the Turnpike until sometime in the 1990s?

I want to say around 1996 they either started or finished construction on the connector.
Logged

jmacswimmer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1372
  • BING BONG

  • Age: 27
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: Today at 09:22:22 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4815 on: March 10, 2023, 11:33:09 AM »

All of PA is odd...they didn't make connections with the Turnpike at most points, and still don't in some cases, but others they did, such as I-176 towards Reading.

Not sure how the whole history of I-76 came about. While many focus on wanting 76 going thru Philly because of the significance of history, which is false, a lot less is made of why it didn't just continue on its east-west track into NJ, and the Schuykill Expressway simply be an x76.

And not sure about the funding of such.

Brushing up on the timing of things, it looks like the PA Turnpike extension from Carlisle to Valley Forge opened in late 1950, and for 4 years transitioned directly into the Schuylkill until late 1954 when the Turnpike was extended the rest of the way to New Jersey. I had been thinking that I-80S was first designated sometime during that Turnpike-directly-into-Schuylkill timeframe and then simply remained on the Schuylkill by inertia, but it appears I-80S (and I-280) wasn't designated until 1958 so that tosses out that theory. But regardless, I think the timing of those events helps explain why I-76 has always had a direct connection onto the Schuylkill, and I also always assumed it wasn't a coincidence that 3 of the interstates that always directly interchanged with the Turnpike are grandfathered onto substandard routes (I-76/Schuylkill at Valley Forge, I-83 at Harrisburg West, and I-70 at New Stanton).
Logged
"Now, what if da Bearss were to enter the Indianapolis 5-hunnert?"
"How would they compete?"
"Let's say they rode together in a big buss."
"Is Ditka driving?"
"Of course!"
"Then I like da Bear buss."
"DA BEARSSS BUSSSS"

odditude

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 717
  • Location: NOVA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:59:45 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4816 on: March 10, 2023, 06:03:49 PM »

https://goo.gl/maps/4zEErXo9kibLRFRA6
What’s with the sign entering the Turnpike from Exit 5?  Those poles are too high above the sign, plus when does NJTA use wooden posts?

it's temporary construction signage.
Logged

bluecountry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 0
  • Last Login: September 17, 2023, 05:19:20 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4817 on: March 13, 2023, 11:55:21 AM »

What's with the construction at exit 10, is that for the car/truck to car ramp?

Also, yeh I can't believe the NJTP would widen from exit 1 to 4 but NOT get a direct connect to Route 42 and 295 at exit 6.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8590
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:28:10 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4818 on: March 13, 2023, 12:39:55 PM »

There is high demand for widening between Exit 1 and 4. I-295 provides a freeway routing for the movements to/from NJ-42 and I-76, especially with the new flyovers being built.

Although - it appears there might be a future for a direct connection with the Turnpike as well, alongside the upcoming (and very much needed) 6 lane widening project.
Logged

roadman65

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15208
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 09:56:05 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4820 on: March 13, 2023, 02:08:47 PM »

Great article. It’s about time voices are carried out.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8590
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:28:10 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4821 on: March 13, 2023, 02:27:06 PM »

Logged

tckma

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 615
  • I only came for the Appelflappen!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Manayunk, Philadelphia, PA
  • Last Login: September 18, 2023, 10:24:27 AM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4822 on: March 13, 2023, 03:03:41 PM »

I think the real issue was that Federal funding couldn't be used for such interchanges, but they could be built by the toll authorities using their own funding which is probably what New York did. I'm guessing that NJTA and PTC wouldn't use their own funding to connect to free Interstates only because they wanted drivers to stay on their toll road instead of using free roads. And who suffered for that? The general public who couldn't conveniently transit from the Pennsy Pike to I-95 or from the NJT to NJ 42/A.C. Expwy.

The NJTP has no direct connection to I-76/NJ-42/ACE (I count these as the same road because I've long thought the I-76 designation ought to extend down the ACE to Atlantic City), but it does have direct connections to I-195 (7A), I-287 (10), I-278 (13), I-78(14), and I-280 (15W).  I think this was more about not wanting drivers to take the parallel and toll-free I-295 through south Jersey (recall I-195 and I-295 did not have a direct connection between them until a few years ago).

The whole "no direct connection between the PA Turnpike and I-95/I-176/I-81/I-70/etc" thing appears to be uniquely a PTC thing.  Not sure why there are direct connections to I-83, I-283, and I-76 though.

(Also, I haven't been up that way in YEARS, but IIRC the NY Thruway does not have a direct connection to I-84.  I'd argue that the I-87/I-90 split up by Albany isn't REALLY a direct connection either, but you don't have to use surface streets.)
« Last Edit: March 13, 2023, 03:09:44 PM by tckma »
Logged

storm2k

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1330
  • Age: 42
  • Location: NJ
  • Last Login: September 30, 2023, 07:33:58 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4823 on: March 13, 2023, 03:30:01 PM »

I think the real issue was that Federal funding couldn't be used for such interchanges, but they could be built by the toll authorities using their own funding which is probably what New York did. I'm guessing that NJTA and PTC wouldn't use their own funding to connect to free Interstates only because they wanted drivers to stay on their toll road instead of using free roads. And who suffered for that? The general public who couldn't conveniently transit from the Pennsy Pike to I-95 or from the NJT to NJ 42/A.C. Expwy.

The NJTP has no direct connection to I-76/NJ-42/ACE (I count these as the same road because I've long thought the I-76 designation ought to extend down the ACE to Atlantic City), but it does have direct connections to I-195 (7A), I-287 (10), I-278 (13), I-78(14), and I-280 (15W).  I think this was more about not wanting drivers to take the parallel and toll-free I-295 through south Jersey (recall I-195 and I-295 did not have a direct connection between them until a few years ago).

The whole "no direct connection between the PA Turnpike and I-95/I-176/I-81/I-70/etc" thing appears to be uniquely a PTC thing.  Not sure why there are direct connections to I-83, I-283, and I-76 though.

(Also, I haven't been up that way in YEARS, but IIRC the NY Thruway does not have a direct connection to I-84.  I'd argue that the I-87/I-90 split up by Albany isn't REALLY a direct connection either, but you don't have to use surface streets.)

NYSTA improved the connections to 84 some years ago, so it's better than it used to be. PTC wouldn't do it because they would have had to foot the costs of the builds thanks to federal law, so they were content for all connections to be indirect. NJTA built their interchanges in the 50s, and 295 came later and NJTA saw no real need to change things.
Logged

artmalk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 55
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 09:42:42 PM
Re: New Jersey Turnpike
« Reply #4824 on: March 13, 2023, 07:39:58 PM »

(Also, I haven't been up that way in YEARS, but IIRC the NY Thruway does not have a direct connection to I-84)

Now there is a direct connection.  I don't understand why I-87/I-90 is so weird though.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.