New Jersey Turnpike Widening

[Roadman66]

Since the widening program is in effect, to eliminate the bottleneck at exit 8A, won't there be a bottleneck at exit 6, where the project terminates? 

[vdeane]

Given that that's where I-95 breaks off, there'd probably be much less of one, assuming the PTC ever builds that high speed connection.

[qguy]

Even now, so much southbound traffic peels off at the PA spur that it makes sense to end the outer lanes there. The difference in ADT between the PA spur and the main line below the spur will only become more dramatic when the connection between the PATP and I-95 is built and I-95 is publicly routed along the spur.

The three inner lanes continue south (as you know) to Exit 4. From there, it narrows from three lanes to two. The NJTA plans to widen the the Turnpike to three lanes from Exit 4 to the southern end at I-295 at some point in the future, but I don't believe there are firm plans as to when. Someone can provide further info on this is they have it.

[hbelkins]

Even now, so much southbound traffic peels off at the PA spur that it makes sense to end the outer lanes there. The difference in ADT between the PA spur and the main line below the spur will only become more dramatic when the connection between the PATP and I-95 is built and I-95 is publicly routed along the spur.

The three inner lanes continue south (as you know) to Exit 4. From there, it narrows from three lanes to two. The NJTA plans to widen the the Turnpike to three lanes from Exit 4 to the southern end at I-295 at some point in the future, but I don't believe there are firm plans as to when. Someone can provide further info on this is they have it.

Do you really think traffic will pick up on the PA spur just because it gets the I-95 number? Thru traffic from points south is going to use the Del Mem Br and is not going to take I-95 through Philly no matter what the signs say, and the continued use of GPS units for routing will only cause that number to increase. A GPS won't tell drivers to follow a continuously signed I-95 if there is a shorter route of equal quality.

[qguy]

Do you really think traffic will pick up on the PA spur just because it gets the I-95 number? Thru traffic from points south is going to use the Del Mem Br and is not going to take I-95 through Philly no matter what the signs say, and the continued use of GPS units for routing will only cause that number to increase. A GPS won't tell drivers to follow a continuously signed I-95 if there is a shorter route of equal quality.

When I was on the community advisory committee for the PATP/I-95 interchange project (from something like 1993 to 2005), the design research showed there would be enough of an increase to warrant the PTC widening the PATP from 2 to 3 lanes from the current end of the 3rd lane at the US 1/Bensalem exit east to the NJ state line and building a second bridge over the Delaware River. So yeah, the agencies involved are expecting an increase.

This isn't due to long-distance through-travel. It's due to regional travel between the two cities (NY and Phila). The projection is that that some percentage of the traffic which currently is travelling between the two cities, and is now spread out and filtered through mulitple local arteries in order to connect from one system of highways to another, will then be concentrated through the PATP/I-95 connection, along the PATP, and along the NJTP PA spur.

[empirestate]

I think the increase in traffic wouldn't be due so much to the numerical continuity, but merely because the connection on I-95 would now be possible due to the new interchange in PA.

On another note about the widening, it strikes me how much fragmentation there seems to be as far as construction progress is concerned. In some stretches, the new roadways are already paved and nearly ready to go; in other areas there has only been some grading work, and along much of the way there hasn't even been any ROW clearing as of yet. The only thing that seems to have made consistent progress the whole way along is the various bridge widenings (admittedly a major first step).

[qguy]

I think the increase in traffic wouldn't be due so much to the numerical continuity, but merely because the connection on I-95 would now be possible due to the new interchange in PA.

I agree.

To paraphrase the famous quote from Samuel Johnson comparing something he saw to dogs walking on their hind legs: When the connection is finally built, I won't be surprised to find it done well; I'll be surprised to find it done at all.

[Roadman66]

When I was on the community advisory committee for the PATP/I-95 interchange project (from something like 1993 to 2005), the design research showed there would be enough of an increase to warrant the PTC widening the PATP from 2 to 3 lanes from the current end of the 3rd lane at the US 1/Bensalem exit east to the NJ state line and building a second bridge over the Delaware River. So yeah, the agencies involved are expecting an increase.

This isn't due to long-distance through-travel. It's due to regional travel between the two cities (NY and Phila). The projection is that that some percentage of the traffic which currently is travelling between the two cities, and is now spread out and filtered through mulitple local arteries in order to connect from one system of highways to another, will then be concentrated through the PATP/I-95 connection, along the PATP, and along the NJTP PA spur.

I have a question for Mr. QGuy. You seem to have alot of knowledge with this kind of stuff. I can tell since you revealed you were associated with the planning of this project. Well, question if I may. Do you think they will implement more I-95 signage on the Penn. Turnpike Ext. and the Mainline NJTP from Exit 6 all the way to Exit 18W (GWB). For instance, installation of reassurance shields in the ground (example image:https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/i-095_sb_exit_007b_01.jpg or overhead/or both (I prefer both; reading 95 North/95 South, since there are little to none on this part of the turnpike.) Also, will local roads that have an exit with the turnpike between 6 and 18W install interstate 95 shields to direct motorists to the "official" I-95, along with the current NJTP shields that are currently posted. I hope they get rid of this horrible sign: https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/pa_tpk_ext_eb_exit_002_03.jpg since a 95 North shield/NJTP shield should be placed with New York, and possibly the NJTP shield for Camden and South.
Post Merge: October 18, 2011, 07:02:19 PM
Since there are limited signs posted, I don't feel like I'm traveling on I-95 between 6 and 18W...I feel like I'm traveling on the NJTP. I want to feel like I'm traveling on both. This is where implementing I-95 shields would help.

[NE2]

You have to be one with the I-95 shields.

[qguy]

I have a question for Mr. QGuy. You seem to have alot of knowledge with this kind of stuff. I can tell since you revealed you were associated with the planning of this project. Well, question if I may. Do you think they will implement more I-95 signage on the Penn. Turnpike Ext. and the Mainline NJTP from Exit 6 all the way to Exit 18W (GWB). For instance, installation of reassurance shields in the ground (example image:https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/i-095_sb_exit_007b_01.jpg or overhead/or both (I prefer both; reading 95 North/95 South, since there are little to none on this part of the turnpike.) Also, will local roads that have an exit with the turnpike between 6 and 18W install interstate 95 shields to direct motorists to the "official" I-95, along with the current NJTP shields that are currently posted. I hope they get rid of this horrible sign: https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/pa_tpk_ext_eb_exit_002_03.jpg since a 95 North shield/NJTP shield should be placed with New York, and possibly the NJTP shield for Camden and South.

Your question mostly pertains to the NJ side. I live in PA and represented Philadelphia on the CAC. I ended up working for PennDOT for about ten years, so I may know some things regarding intentions on the PA side from a PennDOT perspective (less so from a PTC perspective). But I don't know much about what the NJTA intends to do on the NJTP, or what NJDOT intends to do on the local roads near the NJTP.

The best I can do about signage is speak in generalities. I do know that after the PATP/I-95 connection is built, both sides of the river intend to fully sign I-95 along the NJTP main line, NJTP PA spur, and the PATP.

Since there are limited signs posted, I don't feel like I'm traveling on I-95 between 6 and 18W...I feel like I'm traveling on the NJTP. I want to feel like I'm traveling on both. This is where implementing I-95 shields would help.

For a long time there was no I-95 sign presence on the NJTP at all below the New Brunswick exit. The designation was official but secret. (In order to talk about it, one had to use the cone of silence.) NJTA and NJDOT thought any I-95 signage would confuse the public.

Confuse them even more than having I-95 disappear into and reappear out of thin air? Doesn't seem likely, but that was the rationale at any rate.

There is now "TO I-95" signage in places along the NJTP, I-195, and I-295, but memory fails as to where. (To tell the truth, I never really paid that much attention to the locations.) I think it mostly directs motorists to the current I-95 via I-195 & I-295, but I'm perfectly willing to be corrected on that.

You have to be one with the I-95 shields.

"BE the shield..."

[akotchi]

^^ Most interchanges north of 8A already have I-95 shields on guide signs just past the toll plaza and (in most cases) on the "local" roadways themselves leading to the interchange ramps.  It is not consistent, though.  The mainline does not carry many I-95 shields on BGSs right now.

Not sure how much the Widening Program improves signing on the "free" side of the interchanges.  I personally oversaw the design of guide signs on all approaches to the mainline interchange for Exit 6, and we included provisions for I-95 shields on the panels.  They won't show immediately, but will when the designation is official.

The Widening Program is installing new pull-through signs for the interchanges within the project area.  The new design is already in place south of Exit 6 (by others), but signs between Exits 6 and 8A will (eventually in some cases) add the I-95 shield.

There are other projects coming later that I know of (but can't speak much about right now) that should address your concern on the rest of the Turnpike going north.

[Alps]

Even now, so much southbound traffic peels off at the PA spur that it makes sense to end the outer lanes there. The difference in ADT between the PA spur and the main line below the spur will only become more dramatic when the connection between the PATP and I-95 is built and I-95 is publicly routed along the spur.

The three inner lanes continue south (as you know) to Exit 4. From there, it narrows from three lanes to two. The NJTA plans to widen the the Turnpike to three lanes from Exit 4 to the southern end at I-295 at some point in the future, but I don't believe there are firm plans as to when. Someone can provide further info on this if they have it.

And four lanes from Exit 6 to Exit 4, as well. That's not happening until the Turnpike and Parkway widenings (30-63) are done, so figure late 2010s.

I have a question for Mr. QGuy. You seem to have alot of knowledge with this kind of stuff. I can tell since you revealed you were associated with the planning of this project. Well, question if I may. Do you think they will implement more I-95 signage on the Penn. Turnpike Ext. and the Mainline NJTP from Exit 6 all the way to Exit 18W (GWB). For instance, installation of reassurance shields in the ground (example image:https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/i-095_sb_exit_007b_01.jpg or overhead/or both (I prefer both; reading 95 North/95 South, since there are little to none on this part of the turnpike.) Also, will local roads that have an exit with the turnpike between 6 and 18W install interstate 95 shields to direct motorists to the "official" I-95, along with the current NJTP shields that are currently posted. I hope they get rid of this horrible sign: https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/pa_tpk_ext_eb_exit_002_03.jpg since a 95 North shield/NJTP shield should be placed with New York, and possibly the NJTP shield for Camden and South.

I actually have some knowledge of the I-95 signage on the NJ side. Yes, expect NJTP and I-95 side by side on all of the green guide signs - this would become their standard anywhere from Exit 6 on up. I can't say whether more I-95 shields will be installed on the ground for the NJTP mainline, but I have my doubts, just because you don't really see NJTP shields installed on the ground either. On connecting arterials, do not expect I-95 to appear alongside the NJTP shields. I could explain more about some of what I've said here, but would rather limit what I talk about publicly. Just trust that I know what I'm saying...

[Alps]

^^ Most interchanges north of 8A already have I-95 shields on guide signs just past the toll plaza and (in most cases) on the "local" roadways themselves leading to the interchange ramps.  It is not consistent, though.  The mainline does not carry many I-95 shields on BGSs right now.

Not sure how much the Widening Program improves signing on the "free" side of the interchanges.  I personally oversaw the design of guide signs on all approaches to the mainline interchange for Exit 6, and we included provisions for I-95 shields on the panels.  They won't show immediately, but will when the designation is official.

The Widening Program is installing new pull-through signs for the interchanges within the project area.  The new design is already in place south of Exit 6 (by others), but signs between Exits 6 and 8A will (eventually in some cases) add the I-95 shield.

There are other projects coming later that I know of (but can't speak much about right now) that should address your concern on the rest of the Turnpike going north.

(: May I suggest a little friendly competition for those other projects

[akotchi]

I could explain more about some of what I've said here, but would rather limit what I talk about publicly. Just trust that I know what I'm saying...

I feel your pain . . .

(: May I suggest a little friendly competition for those other projects

Bring it on!

[Alps]

I could explain more about some of what I've said here, but would rather limit what I talk about publicly. Just trust that I know what I'm saying...

I feel your pain . . .

Eh, at least I know there's one other person who knows what I'm talking about. (:

(: May I suggest a little friendly competition for those other projects

Bring it on!

I'm a little surprised that they're not letting multiple contracts, actually. At least, that was my impression, but I'm a little too junior to be involved in proposals.

[2Co5_14]

Even now, so much southbound traffic peels off at the PA spur that it makes sense to end the outer lanes there. The difference in ADT between the PA spur and the main line below the spur will only become more dramatic when the connection between the PATP and I-95 is built and I-95 is publicly routed along the spur.

The three inner lanes continue south (as you know) to Exit 4. From there, it narrows from three lanes to two. The NJTA plans to widen the the Turnpike to three lanes from Exit 4 to the southern end at I-295 at some point in the future, but I don't believe there are firm plans as to when. Someone can provide further info on this is they have it.

Do you really think traffic will pick up on the PA spur just because it gets the I-95 number? Thru traffic from points south is going to use the Del Mem Br and is not going to take I-95 through Philly no matter what the signs say, and the continued use of GPS units for routing will only cause that number to increase. A GPS won't tell drivers to follow a continuously signed I-95 if there is a shorter route of equal quality.

There will also be 2 types of traffic leaving the turnpike at exit 7 via I-195 west to continue on I-295 south:
1. People traveling between NYC/northern NJ and the NJ suburbs across the river from Philly (Camden, Cherry Hill, etc...).
2. Cheap people like me who use I-295 to avoid at least some of the tolls.

[akotchi]

I'm a little surprised that they're not letting multiple contracts, actually. At least, that was my impression, but I'm a little too junior to be involved in proposals.

Same here . . . Perhaps they are looking for consistency in design, but one contract per roadway would still accomplish that.  There will still be multiple construction contracts, though.

[Zmapper]

Just thought of this:

If the Turnpike has essentially redundant two carriageways put together, couldn't the express and local carriageways be privatized or ran by competing companies? This is one of the few examples of true competition between roads.

[Alps]

Just thought of this:

If the Turnpike has essentially redundant two carriageways put together, couldn't the express and local carriageways be privatized or ran by competing companies? This is one of the few examples of true competition between roads.

Absolutely not, because you lose the flexibility to divert traffic in the case of an accident. Besides, if a public entity is profitable, why privatize it?

[Zmapper]

The traffic can just use the other companies roadway.

Competition is why say, a cell phone has gone from $2000 down to $50. Plus, the Blackberries and iPhones of today are much better than the bricks of yesterday. Same with roads. Why are we sitting in the same traffic, crossing the same old bridges, riding on the same bumpy pavement that we have for the last 50 years? The traffic engineers and planners get the same pay at the end of the month whether they have done a stellar job or a terrible job. When government, or one company holds a monopoly, there is no reason or desire to improve.

I suspect that the companies would be pressured by the other company to provide free flowing traffic even at rush hour by setting the tolls appropriately. Outside of rush hour, they would be pressured to set the rates to be lower than the other road 10' from them, lest they lose customers to them.

In order for this to work, toll gantries would need to be installed. Why are East Coast agencies so slow at modernizing? The Western and Southern Parts of the Country, plus the 409 in Ontario, have figured out a way to charge a toll to a car without them slowing down.

Essentially, the road would become two separately run HOV lanes without the HOV discount. People would get where they are going faster during rush hour, and would pay less outside of rush hour.

Ideally, a 5% or so tax on tolls collected by the toll company would be used for improving local roads. Because the transportation system is a network, a way to subsidize the non-profitable local roads that feed the profitable main roads is necessary.

[empirestate]

There will also be 2 types of traffic leaving the turnpike at exit 7 via I-195 west to continue on I-295 south:
1. People traveling between NYC/northern NJ and the NJ suburbs across the river from Philly (Camden, Cherry Hill, etc...).
2. Cheap people like me who use I-295 to avoid at least some of the tolls.

3. People who don't know about the quicker connection at US 206 (the real Exit 7; your example appears actually to be 7A).