Regional Boards > Northeast

New Jersey Turnpike striping/signing inconsistencies with the current MUTCD?

(1/6) > >>

Breadman17:
Obviously people who’ve driven on a normal road and the NJTP have (hopefully) noticed the inconsistencies from normal roads in places like:

1. The signing has a totally unique formatting to the turnpike, featuring original arrows and formatting on overheads all the way from the turnpike’s original construction…

2. The striping on the road is super strange too - their dashed white lines are SUPER long. For instance where a normal dashed white line would be about 10 feel long each, these ones on the NJTP seem to be maybe 20 or even 25 feet long? I also noticed driving on the turnpike recently that, looking in the gore points of the exits, it appears that a completely filled in gore point has been scratched out and replaced for the \/ shape that we see more commonly today. Historical street view on google maps seems to show that they really did used to be entirely filled in like this…

I just wanted to ask why these things are like this on the road? It fascinates me every time I go down there and I can’t seem to find any good place to look online that’ll tell me where these inconsistencies come from. Has no one stepped in and required them to become more compliant with the MUTCD? (also i’d hope they don’t because I appreciate the differences from normal roads) And why are the old arrows, sign formats and striping standards still in use today? I didn’t see a normal, MUTCD-compliant sign on on the turnpike during my last trip to philadelphia. Why are these things the way they are?

ran4sh:
The turnpike's own standards generally predate the standards in the MUTCD. As for why MUTCD compliance isn't enforced, the usual method for the federal government to enforce the MUTCD is to withhold funding from non-compliant agencies. Since the turnpike funds itself, it doesn't care about federal funding.

Alps:
1. If you look at the most recent signs, the arrows and formatting have changed to substantial conformance with the MUTCD.
2. The MUTCD does not dictate striping lengths. It gives approximate ratios but does not require anything in particular. And yes, gore points used to be filled in for visibility. Many agencies use hatching now.

Breadman17:

--- Quote from: Alps on August 30, 2021, 12:39:49 AM ---2. The MUTCD does not dictate striping lengths. It gives approximate ratios but does not require anything in particular. And yes, gore points used to be filled in for visibility. Many agencies use hatching now.

--- End quote ---

Understandable how they might want to change the signs because they may appear more visible, even if I have an attachment to the old ones (especially the old button copies), but I don’t quite understand why the turnpike would switch to hatching though if the best thing to do is to make everything as visible as possible to ensure fewer mistakes/accidents? Is it too costly for how effective it actually is to fill in the whole thing? And on the striping, the difference on the turnpike’s vs normal roads is pretty big. If they’re 10 feet long on a normal road then that’s a ratio of 1:3, but on the turnpike, if they’re 20/25 feet long that ends up with a ratio of 1:1 or 5:3 which is a pretty big difference. If they just do it differently just because they do then that’s what it is, sometimes i just gotta ask, ya know?

Also your website is awesome! It’s actually the thing that got me to want to visit the NJTP in the first place. Also inspired me to make my own to a degree to post all my pictures that i take of roads to. Super cool!!!

jeffandnicole:

--- Quote from: Breadman17 on August 30, 2021, 12:52:29 AM ---
--- Quote from: Alps on August 30, 2021, 12:39:49 AM ---2. The MUTCD does not dictate striping lengths. It gives approximate ratios but does not require anything in particular. And yes, gore points used to be filled in for visibility. Many agencies use hatching now.

--- End quote ---

Understandable how they might want to change the signs because they may appear more visible, even if I have an attachment to the old ones (especially the old button copies), but I don’t quite understand why the turnpike would switch to hatching though if the best thing to do is to make everything as visible as possible to ensure fewer mistakes/accidents? Is it too costly for how effective it actually is to fill in the whole thing? And on the striping, the difference on the turnpike’s vs normal roads is pretty big. If they’re 10 feet long on a normal road then that’s a ratio of 1:3, but on the turnpike, if they’re 20/25 feet long that ends up with a ratio of 1:1 or 5:3 which is a pretty big difference. If they just do it differently just because they do then that’s what it is, sometimes i just gotta ask, ya know?

Also your website is awesome! It’s actually the thing that got me to want to visit the NJTP in the first place. Also inspired me to make my own to a degree to post all my pictures that i take of roads to. Super cool!!!

--- End quote ---

The NJTA has often said they use the longer dashed (aka 'skip') lines for visibility.  Using measurements from Google's aerial views, the skip lines tend to run about 25-28 feet in length, with the gap around 22-23 feet in length. There's one or two other roads in the country that use similar line lengths, but overall it's rare to see this length or ratio.

Also, when people ask about cost, such as for the gore points, I think that questioning runs directly in contrast to the skip line length.  If the Turnpike wanted to save money, they could reduce the length of the skip lines.  If anything, changing the gore points from solid to hatching actually costs more money, especially upfront, because the white paint needs to be painted over with black paint to create the hatching. 

Just to show a comparison of costs: If transportation agencies in general wanted to reduce costs, every roadway would feature unrestricted passing zones (which only require a skip line painted) over a full no passing zone (which requires 2 solid lines).  Thus, in general, a no passing zone costs up to 6 times the amount of paint, compared to a no passing zone!  A one-sided passing zone still costs about 4x the amount of an unrestricted passing zone.

The Turnpike has gone more-MUTCD in some other areas though.  The deceleration lanes for exits now use the dotted lines at nearly every exit.  And especially from Interchanges 9 - 18, you will fine the Turnpike has switched over to the commonly used MUTCD-style exit signage.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version