Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[roadman65]

Well heck, New York DOT would just put the road names AND the town name together on the same signs and be done with it. They wisely don't care that the MUTCD discourages that practice.

New Jersey DOT used to do it too. The original signing on I-80 in Bergen County in the 1960's had street names and town names on the same signs. Two that I remember are Green St, Teterboro, South Hackensack and Hudson St, Hackensack, Little Ferry. Don't recall how the signs there read nowadays.

The Parkway used to sign 142A as both Hillside- Maplewood and Mill Road was under the original 142 exit gore. Anyway the present day 143A and B southbound ( which used to be reversed up until ten years ago circa) had both Lyons Avenue and Hillside- Maplewood together on previous guides.  Further north Exit 144 had South Orange Avenue and Vailsburg Area Newark on the SB exit guide.

The Parkway used to use upper case for road names and mixed for control cities before the recent signs were installed per MUTCD.

[roadman65]

Why does the Garden State Parkway still sign Exit 159 as the George Washington Bridge? Considering Exit 153 was changed from Lincoln Tunnel to Secaucus and Exit 140 the Holland Tunnel control got changed to Hillside, you figure that it would be changed to New York City to be uniform.

It seems Exits 140 and 153 got changed to reflect MUTCD updates, but Exit 159 got carbon copied instead when the GSP changed out all guides in North Jersey.

[Rothman]

Why does the Garden State Parkway still sign Exit 159 as the George Washington Bridge? Considering Exit 153 was changed from Lincoln Tunnel to Secaucus and Exit 140 the Holland Tunnel control got changed to Hillside, you figure that it would be changed to New York City to be uniform.

It seems Exits 140 and 153 got changed to reflect MUTCD updates, but Exit 159 got carbon copied instead when the GSP changed out all guides in North Jersey.

You answered your own question.  In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

[roadman65]

Why does the Garden State Parkway still sign Exit 159 as the George Washington Bridge? Considering Exit 153 was changed from Lincoln Tunnel to Secaucus and Exit 140 the Holland Tunnel control got changed to Hillside, you figure that it would be changed to New York City to be uniform.

It seems Exits 140 and 153 got changed to reflect MUTCD updates, but Exit 159 got carbon copied instead when the GSP changed out all guides in North Jersey.

You answered your own question.  In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

No I didn’t. I just pointed out that they carbon copied one out of all.   The question is why carbon copy only one and not the rest?

[Rothman]

Why does the Garden State Parkway still sign Exit 159 as the George Washington Bridge? Considering Exit 153 was changed from Lincoln Tunnel to Secaucus and Exit 140 the Holland Tunnel control got changed to Hillside, you figure that it would be changed to New York City to be uniform.

It seems Exits 140 and 153 got changed to reflect MUTCD updates, but Exit 159 got carbon copied instead when the GSP changed out all guides in North Jersey.

You answered your own question.  In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

No I didn’t. I just pointed out that they carbon copied one out of all.   The question is why carbon copy only one and not the rest?

Perhaps read past the first sentence of a post before reacting.

[jakeroot]

I barely know the area, but this...

In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

...doesn't seem like a satisfactory answer to his question.

If bridges and tunnels are not allowed as control cities, "George Washington Bridge" should have been replaced same as the others.

[Rothman]

I barely know the area, but this...

In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

...doesn't seem like a satisfactory answer to his question.

If bridges and tunnels are not allowed as control cities, "George Washington Bridge" should have been replaced same as the others.

"Not allowed"?  Oh yes, the control city police turn up when they see the sign and make you take it down, right?...not that GWB isn't on about 2,000 signs in the area already without any consequence over the past gazillion years...

It can be easily envisioned that there was a 20-second discussion about what to put on the sign and someone saying GWB is more informative to those headed into whichever section of Manhattan than a generic "New York."

And, with that, I'm not getting any more sucked into another stupid control city debate...

[jeffandnicole]

I barely know the area, but this...

In the end, it didn't matter and GSP stuck with the specific bridge entry to New York than a generic control city.

...doesn't seem like a satisfactory answer to his question.

If bridges and tunnels are not allowed as control cities, "George Washington Bridge" should have been replaced same as the others.

"Not allowed"?  Oh yes, the control city police turn up when they see the sign and make you take it down, right?...not that GWB isn't on about 2,000 signs in the area already without any consequence over the past gazillion years...

It can be easily envisioned that there was a 20-second discussion about what to put on the sign and someone saying GWB is more informative to those headed into whichever section of Manhattan than a generic "New York."

And, with that, I'm not getting any more sucked into another stupid control city debate...

While many believe control cities can only be cities, the MUTCD does mention "The determination of major destinations or control cities" in Support #4 under https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm#section2E13 . And since the GSP isn't an interstate covered in the control city list as shown in the AASHTO guide, nothing is really wrong with it.

[roadman65]

I don’t have a major issue with it like Highwaystar does about Baltimore on I-70 or NE2 with spelling and others on here with Wilmington being used on the NJ Turnpike etc.

I just think it’s odd and inconsistent with the other signs they amended on the Parkway.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/S5kb8g1gaf4sArkh8
Still signing the Garden State Parkway as locals will call it. Not knocking, but think it’s odd considering signing techniques have changed drastically. Plus it a NJTA assembly not NJDOT, which is more odd considering it’s a state maintained roadway.

I think it’s very nostalgic to see the signs as it was growing up in the seventies. Seeing Parkway South signed is a welcome reminder of our road history.

[storm2k]

https://goo.gl/maps/S5kb8g1gaf4sArkh8
Still signing the Garden State Parkway as locals will call it. Not knocking, but think it’s odd considering signing techniques have changed drastically. Plus it a NJTA assembly not NJDOT, which is more odd considering it’s a state maintained roadway.

I think it’s very nostalgic to see the signs as it was growing up in the seventies. Seeing Parkway South signed is a welcome reminder of our road history.

Actually surprised that sign survived the exit 163 reconstruction. Eventually NJDOT will probably come for that gantry, it doesn't look like it's in the world's greatest shape. Either it will get a more standard NJDOT treatment or maybe it will be like the 17 NB -> Parkway NB treatment which is just a Parkway entrance gore point sign.

[roadman65]

Well considering that Midland Avenue to the north of it and the exchange to the south of it have the older style small guide signs in upper case, the latter you mention will prevail.

The only reason why NJ 4 has a NJDOT sign for the Parkway South, because of the NJ 4/ 17 interchange reconstruction along with the IKEA Drive Interchange construction which gave Route 4 a c/d roadway where the Parkway exits going WB that included signage for the entire project area.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/5xymaLk5z1CkdiVa8
I remember when the 65 cents was ten cents.

[The Ghostbuster]

Those were the days.

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/66WQe4FyhyYKtQxX7

This is interesting. Control cities being used on a local road in Cape May County for the Parkway.

[jeffandnicole]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/66WQe4FyhyYKtQxX7

This is interesting. Control cities being used on a local road in Cape May County for the Parkway.

What am I missing? Seems standard.

[ixnay]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/66WQe4FyhyYKtQxX7

This is interesting. Control cities being used on a local road in Cape May County for the Parkway.

Specifically, Avalon Boulevard.

[shadyjay]

Wow... what is the deal with that SB onramp? 
I see no visible obstructions that prohibit putting the ramp directly across from the SB offramp.  You know.  Like a normal interchange. 

Perhaps the OP was referring to the fact that control cities for onramp signage on the GSP aren't usually a thing.  Every onramp signage I've seen has only been the one shown a little farther up (with the up/right arrow and right side of sign angled).  Even a lot of guide signs which have the logo list the destination as "GS PARKWAY", or something similar.

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/66WQe4FyhyYKtQxX7

This is interesting. Control cities being used on a local road in Cape May County for the Parkway.

What am I missing? Seems standard.

Not for the Parkway. Usually you get a small shields with the two directions and the infamous entry trapezoid. Very rare you get control cities in NJDOT fashion for the Parkway.

Even NJ 440 don’t use them with the new sine salad in Woodbridge from the most recent resigning project. The SB 440 to SB Parkway has none even though Shore Points should be used there from one major highway to another.

[SignBridge]

Route 440 is not the only place no destinations are shown for the GS Parkway at major highway interchanges. Another is I-80 in Saddle Brook which just shows North and South; period. Ditto for the I-280 interchange in East Orange and the I-78 interchange further south.

Maybe they are afraid that posting destinations will result in truckers following those signs onto the restricted Parkway.

[ixnay]

Wow... what is the deal with that SB onramp? 
I see no visible obstructions that prohibit putting the ramp directly across from the SB offramp.  You know.  Like a normal interchange. 

Wasn't it mentioned way way up thread that the weird ramp pattern at exit 13 had to do with that stretch of the GSP originally being two-lane?

[jeffandnicole]

Wow... what is the deal with that SB onramp? 
I see no visible obstructions that prohibit putting the ramp directly across from the SB offramp.  You know.  Like a normal interchange. 

Wasn't it mentioned way way up thread that the weird ramp pattern at exit 13 had to do with that stretch of the GSP originally being two-lane?

It was, as is visible in the 1954 historicaerials.com photos.  However, it's fairly visible that numerous other interchanges were constructed in the 2 lane section either with the intention of being 4 lanes with ramps designed for such, or built properly with right hand exits when constructed to 4 lanes.  This ramp for whatever reason was not constructed to such standards.

[roadman65]

Route 440 is not the only place no destinations are shown for the GS Parkway at major highway interchanges. Another is I-80 in Saddle Brook which just shows North and South; period. Ditto for the I-280 interchange in East Orange and the I-78 interchange further south.

Maybe they are afraid that posting destinations will result in truckers following those signs onto the restricted Parkway.

Yup. The Garden State Parkway was never signed as a connecting freeway from other freeways. East Orange from I-280 signs it with Oraton Parkway ( is Service Road) and I-80 signs it with Saddle Brook, which is via an exit to Pehl Avenue. I-78 uses redundant text.   The New York Thruway uses New Jersey, as New York rarely likes to acknowledge that NJ has cities. Only recently was Newark added to I-95 in The Bronx as it was always New Jersey.

However, back to The Parkway, very rarely were control cities used for ramps including the original free NJDOT part in North Central Jersey.  Maybe a few like US 1 in Fords until the SB 130 to NB US 1 was added where Newark/ New York got removed when Newark was added as a 130 NB control city.

Toms River on NJ 37 did have them, but I believe it was because US 9 is concurrent with it there.

[NJRoadfan]

NJDOT is randomly adding control cites on new signs for the GSP (and Turnpike for that matter). New signs at US-22 have Woodbridge on them for the GSP South. I prefer that to their other new trend of spelling out "Garden State Parkway" on signs that were never sized for it. The shield along with "G S Parkway" is distinctive enough!

[roadman65]

NJDOT is randomly adding control cites on new signs for the GSP (and Turnpike for that matter). New signs at US-22 have Woodbridge on them for the GSP South. I prefer that to their other new trend of spelling out "Garden State Parkway" on signs that were never sized for it. The shield along with "G S Parkway" is distinctive enough!

I know the NJ70/ CR 528 reconfiguration project added Toms River and Woodbridge to the ramps to the GSP from Route 70.  Also on US 9 in Pleasant Plains control cities were added for the ramp taking US 9 south onto the Parkway as a different project.