Print

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

[roadman65]

I-295 North should be only signed to US 1 in Lawrence.  Then E-W along I-295 from US 1 to the PA border.  Then in PA sign it N-S again.  Just like US 101 is in Washington as it progresses through the Olympic Peninsula. It goes N-S, E-W, and back to N-S.

[ixnay]

On the NJ Tpk thread there were one or two posts referring to Paterson Plank Road as "PPR".  Is that local custom, like "LIE" or "BQE" across the Hudson and East?

[Alps]

On the NJ Tpk thread there were one or two posts referring to Paterson Plank Road as "PPR".  Is that local custom, like "LIE" or "BQE" across the Hudson and East?

I don't think it's really in popular usage, but when you're discussing projects involving PPR it's a lot quicker to type (:

[jeffandnicole]

NJDOT announces real-time traffic alert system for commercial vehicles

(Trenton)- New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) Commissioner Diane Gutierrez Scaccetti today announced the implementation of a real-time traffic alert system for commercial vehicle drivers, making NJDOT one of the first states in the country to offer this safety feature. The system offers in-cab traffic congestion updates and slowdown alerts to commercial vehicle drivers on 647 miles of New Jersey’s highways, including the New Jersey Turnpike, Garden State Parkway, and Atlantic City Expressway. Commercial vehicle drivers will be alerted about two to three miles before the slowdown begins, giving them plenty of time to reduce speed to help prevent crashes.

Press release at www.bit.ly/33rDzyg

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

[famartin]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

Maryland uses them. I haven’t seen the in Virginia.

[jeffandnicole]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

Control-city opinion notwithstanding, these are a long-time NJDOT trademark.  I don't know if the control city is really all that necessary on modern day signage, as most people would probably find the route number more important.  It generally doesn't hurt though, and can provide some motorists with secondary confirmation that's the direction one wants to go.

Personally, I would rather NJDOT sign route numbers approaching an intersection better than what they often do.  That sign is the only signage existing in this direction as to the cardinal directions of US 22. If someone has already committed to a lane, they may now need to change the lane they're in (and then, people get all irritated that someone "doesn't know how to drive" because they're switching lanes at the last moment).

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

Control-city opinion notwithstanding, these are a long-time NJDOT trademark.  I don't know if the control city is really all that necessary on modern day signage, as most people would probably find the route number more important.  It generally doesn't hurt though, and can provide some motorists with secondary confirmation that's the direction one wants to go.

Personally, I would rather NJDOT sign route numbers approaching an intersection better than what they often do.  That sign is the only signage existing in this direction as to the cardinal directions of US 22. If someone has already committed to a lane, they may now need to change the lane they're in (and then, people get all irritated that someone "doesn't know how to drive" because they're switching lanes at the last moment).

That assembly used to not have US 22 on it. It was Newark- New York to the left and Somerville to the right.

Yes most side roads at lights have cities only but no route numbers.

[vdeane]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

Dunellen is, however, the destination for continuing on the same road.  Note the straight arrow.  As such, I'd leave it on, given that NJ basically combined the route signs and the destination sign into a single sign.

[storm2k]

https://goo.gl/maps/1NKcazvFDHz1VPcY9
I wish other states would use a guide sign like this, but remove the Dunnelen of course as it’s not a destination of US 22 which is the focus of the sign anyway.

However, I like the concept otherwise.

Dunellen is, however, the destination for continuing on the same road.  Note the straight arrow.  As such, I'd leave it on, given that NJ basically combined the route signs and the destination sign into a single sign.

The only change I would have made would have been to move it to the bottom of the sign instead of the top so the directions for Somerville and Newark line up better.

Also, that leads me back to a complaint. NJDOT needs to just solidify Newark being the control city for 22 as that's where it ends. If you're heading for New York City, you're most likely taking 78 to the Turnpike, not 22 to 1-9. Some signs show Newark, others New York. Newark is slowly going back to being an up and coming city again little by little. Let's show it some love as an actual destination.

[famartin]

Well, lets be honest... you have to be pretty close to Newark to have a good reason to take 22 there. Otherwise, 78 works better for most.

That said, I totally agree that New York should never be used as the control on 22.

[SignBridge]

NJDOT's using New York as the destination on Route 22 probably dates back to before I-78 was built, when 22 was the main route in that direction. And NJDOT just kept repeating what they'd always done........

[roadman65]

Well I have seen signs west of Somerville use Somerville- New York for EB and omit Newark completely.

I didn’t like when I-287 used New York for US 22 and Newark for I-78. That’s been remedied since, but now some I-287 signs use Newark at Exit 14A , but i still say being it’s a major freeway, it should use more local destinations like Green Brook or North Plainfield. Then Somerville should be the US 22 Westbound control at Exit 14B and not Clinton.

As far as signs go NJDOT still has NJ 29 destinations on a U.S. 22 WB mileage sign near North Bridge Street from when NJ 29 used US 22 and US 202 to Lambertville. Also the Flemington Circle reconfiguration also copied Newark for US 202 as well on the guide signs. True most US 202 NB traffic from Flemington does eventually continue on to US 22 East with only some remaining north to I-287 for Bedminster and Morristown, but in all honesty it was copied over from pre 1953 when NJ 29 traveled from Trenton to Newark.

[storm2k]

Well, lets be honest... you have to be pretty close to Newark to have a good reason to take 22 there. Otherwise, 78 works better for most.

That said, I totally agree that New York should never be used as the control on 22.

Yeah i agree with that 78 is better overall, but Newark is where 22 ends, and it does have a connection to 21 and the airport. It's also frustrating that it's inconsistent. Just make Newark the control city there. To my mind, 78 should include Newark and New York together (I could buy an argument to figure out how to get Jersey City in there as well, but no one signs it from 78, as NJDOT uses New York and NJTA uses Holland Tunnel on the NBHCE and just leaves Jersey City designations for 14B and 14C).

[famartin]

Well, lets be honest... you have to be pretty close to Newark to have a good reason to take 22 there. Otherwise, 78 works better for most.

That said, I totally agree that New York should never be used as the control on 22.

Yeah i agree with that 78 is better overall, but Newark is where 22 ends, and it does have a connection to 21 and the airport. It's also frustrating that it's inconsistent. Just make Newark the control city there. To my mind, 78 should include Newark and New York together (I could buy an argument to figure out how to get Jersey City in there as well, but no one signs it from 78, as NJDOT uses New York and NJTA uses Holland Tunnel on the NBHCE and just leaves Jersey City designations for 14B and 14C).

Well, 46 goes to New York too, but fortunately, that control city usage has mostly been abandoned in favor of local controls.  Playing around with Google, it looks like from Mountainside on east, Newark is a fine control for US 22 EB, but further west, 78 is overwhelmingly better.

[roadman65]

Yeah it should be GREEN Brook, then Springfield, and finally Newark.  WB Hillside ( as is already from US 1 & 9) , North Plainfield, and then Somerville.  West of Somerville Clinton is fine.

[storm2k]

Yeah it should be GREEN Brook, then Springfield, and finally Newark.  WB Hillside ( as is already from US 1 & 9) , North Plainfield, and then Somerville.  West of Somerville Clinton is fine.

Neither North Plainfield nor Green Brook are frankly important enough to warrant control city status. I'd be fine for Clinton, Somerville, Springfield, and Newark.

[SignBridge]

Well I've heard of Newark, Springfield and Somerville, but have no idea where Clinton and Green Brook are. Shouldn't larger, more well known places be used?

[famartin]

Well I've heard of Newark, Springfield and Somerville, but have no idea where Clinton and Green Brook are. Shouldn't larger, more well known places be used?

Clinton is a pretty prominent locale where I-78, US 22 and NJ 31 all junction. Its used by all those roads as controls, at least here and there, and works reasonably well.

Green Brook, I agree, probably isn't a great choice.

[noelbotevera]

Who thought this was a good idea?

...was my first reaction upon seeing this for the first time. I drove to New York a few weeks ago and, for spice, took I-280 to the Lincoln Tunnel and up the HHP to my hotel. Now, traffic wasn't bad despite the time (around 3 PM), but this heavy merge from the GSP does not help. I'd like to smack the monkeys responsible for designing I-280 through Newark.

[famartin]

Who thought this was a good idea?

...was my first reaction upon seeing this for the first time. I drove to New York a few weeks ago and, for spice, took I-280 to the Lincoln Tunnel and up the HHP to my hotel. Now, traffic wasn't bad despite the time (around 3 PM), but this heavy merge from the GSP does not help. I'd like to smack the monkeys responsible for designing I-280 through Newark.

There's a bunch of history here. First was that the section between Exit 13 and the Stickel Bridge over the Passaic predates the interstate system and was grandfathered in. With it being mostly in a narrow trench, not much hope for widening without HUGE costs and condemnations. Second, Exit 13 was supposed to be a major freeway exit which would lead down to I-78 west of US 1/9 and NJ 21. But that never materialized, either.

[jeffandnicole]

Who thought this was a good idea?

...was my first reaction upon seeing this for the first time. I drove to New York a few weeks ago and, for spice, took I-280 to the Lincoln Tunnel and up the HHP to my hotel. Now, traffic wasn't bad despite the time (around 3 PM), but this heavy merge from the GSP does not help. I'd like to smack the monkeys responsible for designing I-280 through Newark.

The most heavily traveled metro area in the country. This ain't Kansas.

[noelbotevera]

Who thought this was a good idea?

...was my first reaction upon seeing this for the first time. I drove to New York a few weeks ago and, for spice, took I-280 to the Lincoln Tunnel and up the HHP to my hotel. Now, traffic wasn't bad despite the time (around 3 PM), but this heavy merge from the GSP does not help. I'd like to smack the monkeys responsible for designing I-280 through Newark.

There's a bunch of history here. First was that the section between Exit 13 and the Stickel Bridge over the Passaic predates the interstate system and was grandfathered in. With it being mostly in a narrow trench, not much hope for widening without HUGE costs and condemnations. Second, Exit 13 was supposed to be a major freeway exit which would lead down to I-78 west of US 1/9 and NJ 21. But that never materialized, either.

Assuming that everything was built out, the GSP interchange smacks of poor planning. In order to reach that freeway, you'd have to weave across two lanes of traffic that's also weaving to cross the bridge (a la Fort Pitt Bridge). Going the other direction would be even more fun - a bunch of traffic merging from your left that you suddenly have to deal with in order to continue west.

[famartin]

Who thought this was a good idea?

...was my first reaction upon seeing this for the first time. I drove to New York a few weeks ago and, for spice, took I-280 to the Lincoln Tunnel and up the HHP to my hotel. Now, traffic wasn't bad despite the time (around 3 PM), but this heavy merge from the GSP does not help. I'd like to smack the monkeys responsible for designing I-280 through Newark.

There's a bunch of history here. First was that the section between Exit 13 and the Stickel Bridge over the Passaic predates the interstate system and was grandfathered in. With it being mostly in a narrow trench, not much hope for widening without HUGE costs and condemnations. Second, Exit 13 was supposed to be a major freeway exit which would lead down to I-78 west of US 1/9 and NJ 21. But that never materialized, either.

Assuming that everything was built out, the GSP interchange smacks of poor planning. In order to reach that freeway, you'd have to weave across two lanes of traffic that's also weaving to cross the bridge (a la Fort Pitt Bridge). Going the other direction would be even more fun - a bunch of traffic merging from your left that you suddenly have to deal with in order to continue west.

That's fair. Not sure exactly what they were going for with the GSP interchange other than trying not to destroy all of East Orange, but considering how much they did destroy, almost pointless to have stopped themselves.

[SignBridge]

To further clarify: the current Left Exit 13, was supposed to be the continuation of I-280 East thru Newark to I-78 as someone else said above. But when that didn't get built the freeway was ended at First St.

And what is now the actual continuation of I-280 over the Stickel Bridge was originally supposed to be an exit onto that old four-lane highway (NJ Route 58) to the Bridge and ending across the river in Harrison. And yes, that road is obviously not up to Interstate standards.

I-280 and its interchange with the Garden State Pkwy were designed in the early 1960's according to the engineering standards of that era. And yes, large areas of East Orange were torn down for the project.