New Jersey Turnpike

[Alps]

Could the mileage run this way?

From the beginning of the NJ Turnpike after I-295 (near the D.M. Bridge) to the GW Bridge tolls?

As for the current I-95 mileage in north Jersey...I always thought it was a continuation from the I-80 mileage. It DOES nearly match, to be honest.

Of course there's the nagging issue of the Turnpike not being I-95 south of Exit 6 in Mansfield.

The mileage is based on the Somerset Freeway mileage. This has been gone over in other threads. I'd like to not discuss it AGAIN here.

[Roadwarriors79]

The Kansas Turnpike section of I-70 uses its own mile markers and exit numbers. I-80 uses the mile markers and exit numbers of I-294/Tri State Tollway in Illinois. So if the NJ Turnpike used new exit numbers based on its current mileage, they wouldn't be alone.

[famartin]

I fully expect that if the NJTA ever renumbered the turnpike exits to mileage, it would use the turnpike's mileage straight to the GWB.

That said, it would not be hard to renumber NJ Turnpike exits to use I-95's current mileage, similar to the way PTC has two overlapping number sets for the mainline and Northeast Extension...
1 -> (unnumbered)
2 -> 13
3 -> 26
4 -> 34
5 -> 44
6 -> (unnumbered)
(6A) -> 2
7 -> 8
7A -> 15
8 -> 22
8A -> 28
9 -> 38
10 -> 43
11 -> 45
12 -> 51
13 -> 54
13A -> 57
14 -> 59
(unnumbered) - same
15E -> 62
15W -> 63
15X -> 65
16E -> 67
16W -> 68
18E -> (unnumbered)
18W -> (unnumbered)
68 -> 72
69 -> 73
70 -> 74
71 -> 75
72 -> 76
73 -> 77
74 -> 78

[famartin]

I fully expect that if the NJTA ever renumbered the turnpike exits to mileage, it would use the turnpike's mileage straight to the GWB.

That said, it would not be hard to renumber NJ Turnpike exits to use I-95's current mileage, similar to the way PTC has two overlapping number sets for the mainline and Northeast Extension...
1 -> (unnumbered)
2 -> 13
3 -> 26
4 -> 34
5 -> 44
6 -> (unnumbered)
(6A) -> 2
7 -> 8
7A -> 15
8 -> 22
8A -> 28
9 -> 38
10 -> 43
11 -> 45
12 -> 51
13 -> 54
13A -> 57
14 -> 59
(unnumbered) - same
15E -> 62
15W -> 63
15X -> 65
16E -> 67
16W -> 68
18E -> (unnumbered)
18W -> (unnumbered)
68 -> 72
69 -> 73
70 -> 74
71 -> 75
72 -> 76
73 -> 77
74 -> 78

While I didn't include them, it wouldn't be a bad idea to include W on the western spur exits and E on the eastern spur ones, for clarity.

[Alps]

I fully expect that if the NJTA ever renumbered the turnpike exits to mileage, it would use the turnpike's mileage straight to the GWB.

That said, it would not be hard to renumber NJ Turnpike exits to use I-95's current mileage, similar to the way PTC has two overlapping number sets for the mainline and Northeast Extension...
1 -> (unnumbered)
2 -> 13
3 -> 26
4 -> 34
5 -> 44
6 -> (unnumbered)
(6A) -> 2
7 -> 8
7A -> 15
8 -> 22
8A -> 28
9 -> 38
10 -> 43
11 -> 45
12 -> 51
13 -> 54
13A -> 57
14 -> 59
(unnumbered) - same
15E -> 62
15W -> 63
15X -> 65
16E -> 67
16W -> 68
18E -> (unnumbered)
18W -> (unnumbered)
68 -> 72
69 -> 73
70 -> 74
71 -> 75
72 -> 76
73 -> 77
74 -> 78

While I didn't include them, it wouldn't be a bad idea to include W on the western spur exits and E on the eastern spur ones, for clarity.

The MUTCD would indicate that one alignment becomes the mainline and the other gets numbered as a loop (so 1 to 8 or so).

[dgolub]

Overlapping exit numbers could become an issue in the future if they add more exits, which would probably be at least somewhat more likely after cashless tolling happens.

[jeffandnicole]

Overlapping exit numbers could become an issue in the future if they add more exits, which would probably be at least somewhat more likely after cashless tolling happens.

Never once has the NJTA said they can't add an exit because of existing exit numbers.

[Roadwarriors79]

The Eastern Spur is part of the original Turnpike, so I could see the Western Spur having numbers fudged to avoid duplicate numbers from the Eastern Spur if/when there was a renumbering of exits.

[PHLBOS]

Overlapping exit numbers could become an issue in the future if they add more exits, which would probably be at least somewhat more likely after cashless tolling happens.

Never once has the NJTA said they can't add an exit because of existing exit numbers.

Correct, whenever a new exit/interchange was added/built; such would simply be assigned a suffixed exit number.  Examples: 7A, 8A & 15X.

[bluecountry]

Could the mileage run this way?

From the beginning of the NJ Turnpike after I-295 (near the D.M. Bridge) to the GW Bridge tolls?

As for the current I-95 mileage in north Jersey...I always thought it was a continuation from the I-80 mileage. It DOES nearly match, to be honest.

Of course there's the nagging issue of the Turnpike not being I-95 south of Exit 6 in Mansfield.

The mileage is based on the Somerset Freeway mileage. This has been gone over in other threads. I'd like to not discuss it AGAIN here.

Can you link it then, or just tell me when it says on I-95 exit 72...what is that in reference to...mile 72 on I-95 in NJ OR mile 72 on I-80?

Also, why does 80 co-sign with 95 only to end somewhere on the GWB instead of ending at the junction of I-95?

[bluecountry]

I was just driving the NJTP yesterday, and saw something interesting.
They were actually just installing a new sign southbound at MM 29 which says:
   Wilmington-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Baltimore-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Washington-140 miles

Thought it was pretty cool, why are they suddenly doing this (in addition to adding the mileage to Philly southbounch at MM81)?

[jeffandnicole]

I was just driving the NJTP yesterday, and saw something interesting.
They were actually just installing a new sign southbound at MM 29 which says:
   Wilmington-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Baltimore-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Washington-140 miles

Thought it was pretty cool, why are they suddenly doing this (in addition to adding the mileage to Philly southbounch at MM81)?

The sign can clearly be seen from 295 at Interchange 31 too! 

[SignBridge]

Bluecountry, I believe (if anyone knows different please correct me) that I-80 begins and ends at the I-95 interchange in Teaneck. I don't think they run concurrent to the Bridge. And if I remember right, the signs west/southbound coming off the Bridge read something like I-95 to I-80.

Also it's been said in earlier posts that those exit numbers in the 70's between the Teaneck Interchange and the Bridge are actually I-95 numbers based on (I believe) the original Somerset Fwy. mileage, not the more recent PA/NJ Turnpike/I-95 routing.

All of this is a little confusing as I myself originally believed in the concurrent route theory and that those exit numbers were a continuation of I-80 exit numbering, but knowledgable folks on this board have said that is not the case, though such numbering would be similar.

Again if I don't have this right, please correct me. 

[PHLBOS]

Can you link it then, or just tell me when it says on I-95 exit 72...what is that in reference to...mile 72 on I-95 in NJ OR mile 72 on I-80?

Also, why does 80 co-sign with 95 only to end somewhere on the GWB instead of ending at the junction of I-95?

Huh? regarding your second question.  At MM 67.7 along I-80 eastbound.

FWIW I-80 eastbound MM 68.0 at I-95 split

I-80 eastbound's MM 68.2 is located along the ramp to I-95 northbound.

Beyond the interchange along I-95 northbound, NJTP northbound MM 119.2 approaching Exits 70 A/B

Lastly, along I-95 southbound approaching I-80 interchange/Exit 69

The upshot: given that I-80 mileage ends prior to reaching its MM 69.0, it's a reasonable assumption that Exit 70 A/B and the subsequent interchanges to the GW Bridge were based on I-95's pre-1982 mileage.

Side bar: SignBridge, you beat me to the punch.

[SignBridge]

PHLBOS, thanks for confirming what I understood from you NJ/PA guys on this board. Guess we were thinking more or less the same. LOL

[famartin]

Could the mileage run this way?

From the beginning of the NJ Turnpike after I-295 (near the D.M. Bridge) to the GW Bridge tolls?

As for the current I-95 mileage in north Jersey...I always thought it was a continuation from the I-80 mileage. It DOES nearly match, to be honest.

Of course there's the nagging issue of the Turnpike not being I-95 south of Exit 6 in Mansfield.

The mileage is based on the Somerset Freeway mileage. This has been gone over in other threads. I'd like to not discuss it AGAIN here.

Can you link it then, or just tell me when it says on I-95 exit 72...what is that in reference to...mile 72 on I-95 in NJ OR mile 72 on I-80?

Also, why does 80 co-sign with 95 only to end somewhere on the GWB instead of ending at the junction of I-95?

There is no co-signing going towards the bridge.  In fact, it specifically says this on I-80 approaching the end:


While on I-95 northbound itself, there is no mention of I-80:


Now, southbound, there is some co-signing, which is unfortunate, but incorrect:


However, the NJDOT has the last word, and it says thus right here:
https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/00000080__-.pdf
"END I-80 MP=68.54"

[SignBridge]

Guess they forgot the word "TO" between the 95 and 80 shields. What's interesting is that back in the late 1960's before the "missing mile" was built connecting the NJT to I-95/80, the signs coming off the bridge said: "To 80, 17 and Garden State Pkwy" as that road only led to I-80 at the time.

[jaip]

I was just driving the NJTP yesterday, and saw something interesting.
They were actually just installing a new sign southbound at MM 29 which says:
   Wilmington-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Baltimore-xxxx miles (I forgot)
   Washington-140 miles

Thought it was pretty cool, why are they suddenly doing this (in addition to adding the mileage to Philly southbounch at MM81)?

Perhaps setting an example on how to sign I95 corridor. This is a great lesson for Maryland (MdTA).

[sturmde]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

[Alps]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

Doesn't really solve anything.

[sturmde]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

Doesn't really solve anything.

It would help on the Delaware side of the bridge.  I-695 would be the signed route to New York City, I-295 could be struck back to Exit 1 in NJ and be signed as the route to Camden & Trenton.  Then coming in from Delaware, it would be clearer to have I-95 Wilmington, I-495 Philadelphia, I-695 New York City.  Plus, no one on the lower NJTP would think they were still on I-95 any longer.  Emergency services would appreciate the clarity.

[famartin]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

Doesn't really solve anything.

It would help on the Delaware side of the bridge.  I-695 would be the signed route to New York City, I-295 could be struck back to Exit 1 in NJ and be signed as the route to Camden & Trenton.  Then coming in from Delaware, it would be clearer to have I-95 Wilmington, I-495 Philadelphia, I-695 New York City.  Plus, no one on the lower NJTP would think they were still on I-95 any longer.  Emergency services would appreciate the clarity.

As the turnpike alignment would be the more important road, I would suggest signing the turnpike I-295 and changing existing I-295 north of the turnpike to I-695, but I suppose the number recognition and signing costs would make that the less attractive option.

[PHLBOS]

^^IMHO, the only chance that southern portion of the NJTP would become designated as a 3DI (likely I-695) would be if the Turnpike tolls are completely eliminated.  I don't see that happening anytime soon even though such was the original plan once the initial bonds to build the road were paid off.

Additionally, I believe (not 100% certain) that much of said-southern portion, particularly the 4-lane portion, is still the original pre-Interstate standard.

[jeffandnicole]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

Doesn't really solve anything.

It would help on the Delaware side of the bridge.  I-695 would be the signed route to New York City, I-295 could be struck back to Exit 1 in NJ and be signed as the route to Camden & Trenton.  Then coming in from Delaware, it would be clearer to have I-95 Wilmington, I-495 Philadelphia, I-695 New York City.  Plus, no one on the lower NJTP would think they were still on I-95 any longer.  Emergency services would appreciate the clarity.

Based on traffic flow for the past 40 years, it's quite clear which way to go if people want to get to New York from Delaware.

While you must think EMS, police, and fire fighters have a combined IQ of a rock and that every day brings a new team of responders that have never set foot in NJ to the area much less ever heard of the Turnpike, emergency responders that work incidents on the Turnpike are very familiar the Turnpike, much more so than those that occasionally travel the Turnpike, and know that road like the back of their hands. They are able to quickly interpret a caller's location and get the proper responders there.

[SteveG1988]

Now that the decades-long NJTP becoming I-95 is at last accomplished... clearly having an Interstate designation is no longer the issue it was back in the beginning years.  So, just make the southern section I-695 and be done with it.

Doesn't really solve anything.

It would help on the Delaware side of the bridge.  I-695 would be the signed route to New York City, I-295 could be struck back to Exit 1 in NJ and be signed as the route to Camden & Trenton.  Then coming in from Delaware, it would be clearer to have I-95 Wilmington, I-495 Philadelphia, I-695 New York City.  Plus, no one on the lower NJTP would think they were still on I-95 any longer.  Emergency services would appreciate the clarity.

As the turnpike alignment would be the more important road, I would suggest signing the turnpike I-295 and changing existing I-295 north of the turnpike to I-695, but I suppose the number recognition and signing costs would make that the less attractive option.

Please...for the love of god, don't do this. We've just had to do a exit number and interstate number change already, 95 north of trenton being 295 now, with "old exit" signs, same with 95 in PA north of the turnpike.