New Jersey Turnpike

[vdeane]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As of today, I-95 splits in two, which isn't supposed to happen.  And there are loops that are shorter; just look at I-277 in Charlotte.

[jeffandnicole]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

[lstone19]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

I concur. Too many people get bent out of shape if every i is dotted and every t crossed, even when there is a good reason for an exception. Think of the eastern and western roads as similar to an express/local configuration or a C/D road. They just get father apart than most but take you to the same place. And if they take you to the same place a short distance (for some definition of short) down the road, a separate number just confuses things, particularly to those of us who are old school who consider the number secondary to the named toll toad.

[SignBridge]

If they absolutely have to assign an Interstate route number to both legs, why not simplify it by calling them 95W and 95E ?

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

I concur. Too many people get bent out of shape if every i is dotted and every t crossed, even when there is a good reason for an exception. Think of the eastern and western roads as similar to an express/local configuration or a C/D road. They just get father apart than most but take you to the same place. And if they take you to the same place a short distance (for some definition of short) down the road, a separate number just confuses things, particularly to those of us who are old school who consider the number secondary to the named toll toad.

Right. To me they're two different alignments of the same through road.  I never had a problem with two I-95s there and it's been well over 50 years and now they want to change.

[tmoore952]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

I grew up right near I-95 on the north side of Wilmington.

NJ can have all the through traffic to NY-NE. Philly's bad enough as it is. Chester has a tight squeeze just south of Comm. Barry Bridge with houses on either side for which nothing can be done without a complete rerouting (the road there was actually US 322. before I-95 was built).

[Steve D]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

Looking at GSV, it appears new overhead hybrid VMS signs are going up / have gone up at the east / west spur splits with a blank placeholder for 695.  Going southbound on the turnpike at the split past US 46, signs now list "TPK South / Lincoln Tunnel" for the eastern spur (with a blank slot to the left of the turnpike symbol)  and "TPK/95 South / Trenton" for the western spur, which replace signs with the limited exit numbers (16W, 17, etc). Similarly going northbound the signs now list "95 North / 280 West / George Washington Bridge" for the western spur and "80 West / Lincoln Tunnel" for the eastern spur (with a blank slot to the left of 80 west), which replace signs that listed all of the exits for each spur (exits 15W-16W-18W etc..).   I guess most people use GPS now but wonder if not having the exit numbers will be an issue.  Also, the "80 West" (and not "TO 80 West") may be confusing as the primary route for the eastern spur until they add 695.  Not sure if things have changed since these GSV pictures.

[Alps]

What were the determining factors in which alignment (East or West) would be the I-695.

Through I-95 traffic is encouraged to use the western roadway. At the north end, the ramp configuration is designed for the main flows to be western roadway to/from the GWB and eastern roadway to/from I-80. Hence, it would make sense for the western roadway to carry the I-95 number.

That's correct.  I know a friend of a friend of a friend that has access to Turnpike employees and I'm told that there were two simple reasons.  First is as you stated.  The southbound through movements in what they refer to as the "Northern Mixing Bowl" has 95 from the bridge form the West and the east in formed from I-80.  This theory minimizes the weaving and lane changes approaching the mixing bowl.  Secondarily, was to keep the through movement away from Lincoln Tunnel commuters.

I do wonder though if the application reroutes 95 off of the East because the east was the original alignment.  To my knowledge, when 95 shields starting showing up on signing on the West I don't think they asked.

I don't think I-95 needs to be approved for a reroute as long as it goes through all of the listed control cities. This is from existing freeway to parallel existing freeway, so can probably be done anytime. Just guessing.

[SignBridge]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As long as the NJ Turnpike shield stays, everyone will be fine.

Just look at Delaware and the number of people going towards the NJ Tpk rather than 95. They figure it out. Those using GPS couldn't care if it was a dirt path...they're gonna follow what the electronic machine says to do.

Looking at GSV, it appears new overhead hybrid VMS signs are going up / have gone up at the east / west spur splits with a blank placeholder for 695.  Going southbound on the turnpike at the split past US 46, signs now list "TPK South / Lincoln Tunnel" for the eastern spur (with a blank slot to the left of the turnpike symbol)  and "TPK/95 South / Trenton" for the western spur, which replace signs with the limited exit numbers (16W, 17, etc). Similarly going northbound the signs now list "95 North / 280 West / George Washington Bridge" for the western spur and "80 West / Lincoln Tunnel" for the eastern spur (with a blank slot to the left of 80 west), which replace signs that listed all of the exits for each spur (exits 15W-16W-18W etc..).   I guess most people use GPS now but wonder if not having the exit numbers will be an issue.  Also, the "80 West" (and not "TO 80 West") may be confusing as the primary route for the eastern spur until they add 695.  Not sure if things have changed since these GSV pictures.

Funny, the old signs said "To 46 80"

[roadman65]

Considering New Jersey was always big with Exit numbers as a reference, it's hard to believe that they won't be signed anymore at the Newark Split.

Considering that northbound approach to that split is sort of like the end of the mainline that splits into two separate extensions ( hence the name spurs) that further exit info would be still used.

IMO they should have tabs that are similar to I-78 EB with Exits 14A-14C to be Exits 15W-18W for the west and Exits 15E-18E for the original east approaching the split.    SB at Ridgefield Park should use a supplemental sign denoting the east spur for Exits 17- 15x and west spur for 19W-16W.  16E is irrelevant SB and both 15E and 15W are accessible from either so no tabs needed there.

[SignBridge]

I'll take a guess that the NJTA determined that today's generation of drivers finds the destinations and route numbers more useful and easier to read than all those exit numbers. And I would tend to agree with them.

[roadman65]

I'll take a guess that the NJTA determined that today's generation of drivers finds the destinations and route numbers more useful and easier to read than all those exit numbers. And I would tend to agree with them.

Then you got the nearby PTC and NYSTA that signs the exits from every on ramp entering their toll roads.  I'm not saying do that, but if your looking for Secaucus Junction now it would be harder without the 15X exit number.

[vdeane]

I'll take a guess that the NJTA determined that today's generation of drivers finds the destinations and route numbers more useful and easier to read than all those exit numbers. And I would tend to agree with them.

Then you got the nearby PTC and NYSTA that signs the exits from every on ramp entering their toll roads.  I'm not saying do that, but if your looking for Secaucus Junction now it would be harder without the 15X exit number.

Not all of them.  They're not used near Rochester or Syracuse.

[jmacswimmer]

I'll take a guess that the NJTA determined that today's generation of drivers finds the destinations and route numbers more useful and easier to read than all those exit numbers. And I would tend to agree with them.

Then you got the nearby PTC and NYSTA that signs the exits from every on ramp entering their toll roads.  I'm not saying do that, but if your looking for Secaucus Junction now it would be harder without the 15X exit number.

Not all of them.  They're not used near Rochester or Syracuse.

And the PTC seems to be phasing them out as they replace signs - here's examples from Breezewood, Downingtown, Willow Grove, Bensalem, & Allentown.

[Mergingtraffic]

I like the Eastern Spur because it's got six lanes and less traffic than the Western Spur with only four overcrowded lanes.

I never did understand why they built the western spur at four lanes north of Exit 16W, considering the amount of traffic being in a large metropolitan area. Even in 1971, when it opened, they already had the eastern Spur built to six lanes due to traffic demands of the time. Yet they built this part of the spur to this configuration.

Same.  Whenever I'm estimating trips, Google shows more congestion on the Western than the Eastern, so I take the Eastern.  With ORT now on the Eastern as well as the Western, it's no contest.  Hopefully the widening will fix that.

I think at that time in 1970, they thought building a whole separate road would've been enough.  The equivalent of widening the eastern with 2 extra lanes each way.  But today, it seems to be the very last thing they will touch.   Why IDK. I'd widen that before Exits 6-1.

[roadman65]

I like the Eastern Spur because it's got six lanes and less traffic than the Western Spur with only four overcrowded lanes.

I never did understand why they built the western spur at four lanes north of Exit 16W, considering the amount of traffic being in a large metropolitan area. Even in 1971, when it opened, they already had the eastern Spur built to six lanes due to traffic demands of the time. Yet they built this part of the spur to this configuration.

Same.  Whenever I'm estimating trips, Google shows more congestion on the Western than the Eastern, so I take the Eastern.  With ORT now on the Eastern as well as the Western, it's no contest.  Hopefully the widening will fix that.

I think at that time in 1970, they thought building a whole separate road would've been enough.  The equivalent of widening the eastern with 2 extra lanes each way.  But today, it seems to be the very last thing they will touch.   Why IDK. I'd widen that before Exits 6-1.

I was wondering why the Harmon Meadows Blvd overpass is built with provisions for an outer roadway on both sides. Considering that was built in the early eighties a decade after the Western Spur Opened, it was clear that there was a proposal to add a dual carriageway on the Eastern Spur or some sort of other configuration.


Also the phase out on both PA and N.Y. toll road ramp exit numbers might be because of AET. Remember that the Exit numbers on the NJ Turnpike are for ticket reference more than anything. It helps the driver at a quick glance locate his or her exit to figure the toll.  In fact Exit 1 is not a specific ramp, nor is Exits 18E& W as they are the toll booths that handle the cash collection and ticket distribution for through traffic at both end of the ticket system.

[jeffandnicole]

I like the Eastern Spur because it's got six lanes and less traffic than the Western Spur with only four overcrowded lanes.

I never did understand why they built the western spur at four lanes north of Exit 16W, considering the amount of traffic being in a large metropolitan area. Even in 1971, when it opened, they already had the eastern Spur built to six lanes due to traffic demands of the time. Yet they built this part of the spur to this configuration.

Same.  Whenever I'm estimating trips, Google shows more congestion on the Western than the Eastern, so I take the Eastern.  With ORT now on the Eastern as well as the Western, it's no contest.  Hopefully the widening will fix that.

I think at that time in 1970, they thought building a whole separate road would've been enough.  The equivalent of widening the eastern with 2 extra lanes each way.  But today, it seems to be the very last thing they will touch.   Why IDK. I'd widen that before Exits 6-1.

They're widening 1 - 4.  The roadway between Interchanges 4 - 6 will remain as is, as there's very few traffic issues in that area other than SB traffic approaching Interchange 4 due to the narrowing.

I would imagine widening 1 - 4 may be a priority due to the age of the infrastructure.  Every overpass that hasn't been widened or otherwise reconstructed since the Turnpike's opening is over 70 years old at this point, and they're all located in this stretch of highway.

As for why the westerly roadway up north wasn't built to 3 lanes each way originally - I'll go with the reasoning I've used other times:  50 years ago, it was probably tough to imagine how traffic would increase in 50 years.  That was an era where people thought flying cars would be up and coming.  Or at least automatic cars.  Flying cars never happened, and they're not exactly succeeding with self-driving cars either.

And also:  Predict 50 years from now how traffic will be.  Be accurate and precise.

We can probably take somewhat of a guess what'll happen in the future, and how traffic will grow.  But I can also look back at reports from just 20 years ago and see how wrong some of them are, so it's always a gamble what the future will bring.

[Pete from Boston]

As for why the westerly roadway up north wasn't built to 3 lanes each way originally - I'll go with the reasoning I've used other times:  50 years ago, it was probably tough to imagine how traffic would increase in 50 years.  That was an era where people thought flying cars would be up and coming.  Or at least automatic cars.  Flying cars never happened, and they're not exactly succeeding with self-driving cars either.

And also:  Predict 50 years from now how traffic will be.  Be accurate and precise.

We can probably take somewhat of a guess what'll happen in the future, and how traffic will grow.  But I can also look back at reports from just 20 years ago and see how wrong some of them are, so it's always a gamble what the future will bring.

The Westerly Alignment was already in planning to be expanded to dual-dual by the late 1980s. I have the plan somewhere and if I ever find myself with a lot of time on my hands will scan them. But of course that (and the concurrent Route 17 extension to the Turnpike) never happened. I suspect in today's climate, literally and figuratively, any expansion here will be more modest.

[NJRoadfan]

Someone here already posted the plans for the widening. It had some pretty crazy ramps at the Pulaski Skyway.

[Steve D]

Someone here already posted the plans for the widening. It had some pretty crazy ramps at the Pulaski Skyway.

That was me from about 10 years ago.  Search for the "Old NJ Turnpike Photos" thread.  I posted pictures of the proposed widening of exits 15E, 15W, and 16W with the new ramps, from the 1985-90 Turnpike widening program report.    However I did not have pictures of the proposed exit 15W-A which was in a draft version of the report but did not make the final.  I recall the design of Exit 15W-A was similar to that of the proposed 16W which I posted (double Y-shape).  I think 15W-A was supposed to connect to either state route 17 or 20.

[Pete from Boston]

I believe it was indeed 17, and the space between 17, 3, and the Turnpike at that time was discussed as the location for a new baseball stadium, the NJSEA apparently taking George Steinbrenner's moving threats seriously. I'll dig out my copy.

[ran4sh]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZZrUqcx4zpQjiqRG7
Wonder if this I-95 shield will soon be replaced.

I think changing this out would add confusion as I-95 is the straight through route and the eastern spur isn't long enough of a loop to warrant its own number.

As of today, I-95 splits in two, which isn't supposed to happen.  And there are loops that are shorter; just look at I-277 in Charlotte.

277 might be shorter but it has way more exits

[FLAVORTOWN]

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8459564,-74.0177971,3a,54.6y,199.98h,98.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_N6vxOO7gKHiLsODbZQ5sg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The empty areas make sense now with the I-695 application

[roadman65]

What is odd is there is no 19E but a 19W, however 17 exists fine as non suffixed. They have to add a W to create 19 which is odd.

[lstone19]

What is odd is there is no 19E but a 19W, however 17 exists fine as non suffixed. They have to add a W to create 19 which is odd.

Odder to me is that 19W, while physically north of the 18W toll plaza, is south of what was, at least as built, actual Exit 18 (U.S. 46). And if they are going to justify it because it's north of the 18W plaza, that's not consistent with the east side where 17 is north of the 18E plaza.