New Jersey

[bzakharin]

Disagree, the Parkway shield literally says Parkway in there. Theres no need to write it out as "Garden State Parkway", waste of money IMO.

I do think they should continue to write out NJ Turnpike however, as the turnpike text is very tiny and not really visible. But the thing I dont understand is why are they writing out it as "New Jersey Turnpike" - everyone knows about state abbreviations, seems like a waste to write it all out.

The Parkway should be written as GS Parkway and the Turnpike as NJ Turnpike. A common sense solution that won't take up excessive space or incur excessive cost......... And I still say the problem is those Parkway shields don't contrast well with the green background of the signs and don't stand out the way a red, white and blue Interstate shield does or even a white state or US highway shield does.

I think the real problem is that there is nothing on the shield that stands out to non-local drivers the way a large number does for numbered routes. So yes, some sort of written out "GS Parkway" is necessary, but a control city would be useful as well, in addition to that.

[roadman65]

Disagree, the Parkway shield literally says Parkway in there. Theres no need to write it out as "Garden State Parkway", waste of money IMO.

I do think they should continue to write out NJ Turnpike however, as the turnpike text is very tiny and not really visible. But the thing I dont understand is why are they writing out it as "New Jersey Turnpike" - everyone knows about state abbreviations, seems like a waste to write it all out.

The Parkway should be written as GS Parkway and the Turnpike as NJ Turnpike. A common sense solution that won't take up excessive space or incur excessive cost......... And I still say the problem is those Parkway shields don't contrast well with the green background of the signs and don't stand out the way a red, white and blue Interstate shield does or even a white state or US highway shield does.

I think the real problem is that there is nothing on the shield that stands out to non-local drivers the way a large number does for numbered routes. So yes, some sort of written out "GS Parkway" is necessary, but a control city would be useful as well, in addition to that.

The MUTCD forbids signing road names and destinations together as of a few years back.

[roadman65]

I was noticing how when you travel SB on US 9W in Fort Lee you can't access SB I-95 due to a left turn prohibition at the ramp to I-95 SB.

Instead your directed to US 1/9/46 SB to travel three miles to reach SB I-95 and WB I-80 via US 46 after the split with US 1-9.

I figure a left turn lane and protected signal phase can be added without disrupting traffic flow. When NB 9W to Route 4 turns green they could allow SB 9W to turn left to I-95 SB simultaneously as it is directly opposite the turn.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/9b9AHz277XZczuwB6

Also they need a SOUTH header for I-95 as US 46 is not to I-95 NB as the ramp to I-95 NB ( to the GWB) is beyond the turn for US 1/9/46 on the left.


Oh it gets worse on I-95.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/GzMx3pGLq33ocsHa9
Notice the NJ 67 shield here.

Then look here at the end of the Exit 73-74 ramp.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/1RBeS47cNycBYG5M7

No mention of Route 67 once you exit.  How do they expect a driver to locate that particular route?

[NJRoadfan]

A left turn onto I-95 south used to be permitted there. It was removed due to chronic traffic problems at that intersection.

[Rothman]

A left turn onto I-95 south used to be permitted there. It was removed due to chronic traffic problems at that intersection.

^This.  Another case of roadgeek whimsy hitting up against reality.

[SignBridge]

Disagree, the Parkway shield literally says Parkway in there. Theres no need to write it out as "Garden State Parkway", waste of money IMO.

I do think they should continue to write out NJ Turnpike however, as the turnpike text is very tiny and not really visible. But the thing I dont understand is why are they writing out it as "New Jersey Turnpike" - everyone knows about state abbreviations, seems like a waste to write it all out.

The Parkway should be written as GS Parkway and the Turnpike as NJ Turnpike. A common sense solution that won't take up excessive space or incur excessive cost......... And I still say the problem is those Parkway shields don't contrast well with the green background of the signs and don't stand out the way a red, white and blue Interstate shield does or even a white state or US highway shield does.

I think the real problem is that there is nothing on the shield that stands out to non-local drivers the way a large number does for numbered routes. So yes, some sort of written out "GS Parkway" is necessary, but a control city would be useful as well, in addition to that.

The MUTCD forbids signing road names and destinations together as of a few years back.

Not correct Roadman65. Sec. 2E.15.01: A city name and street name on the same sign should be avoided. Note this is a should and not a shall. Therefore it is only a recommendation. And BTW, it's been the same in every edition of the Manual since at least 1971.

Also, the FHWA is a bunch of hypocrites. In the very same 2023 Manual they have graphics of signs showing both road name and city name in the same mixed case lettering on the same sign. See pages 358 and 371. Page 358 shows the common practice of New York DOT Region-10 on Long Island where street and city names have been signed together for over 60 years that I've been watching this stuff.

[roadman65]

Disagree, the Parkway shield literally says Parkway in there. Theres no need to write it out as "Garden State Parkway", waste of money IMO.

I do think they should continue to write out NJ Turnpike however, as the turnpike text is very tiny and not really visible. But the thing I dont understand is why are they writing out it as "New Jersey Turnpike" - everyone knows about state abbreviations, seems like a waste to write it all out.

The Parkway should be written as GS Parkway and the Turnpike as NJ Turnpike. A common sense solution that won't take up excessive space or incur excessive cost......... And I still say the problem is those Parkway shields don't contrast well with the green background of the signs and don't stand out the way a red, white and blue Interstate shield does or even a white state or US highway shield does.

I think the real problem is that there is nothing on the shield that stands out to non-local drivers the way a large number does for numbered routes. So yes, some sort of written out "GS Parkway" is necessary, but a control city would be useful as well, in addition to that.

The MUTCD forbids signing road names and destinations together as of a few years back.

Not correct Roadman65. Sec. 2E.15.01: A city name and street name on the same sign should be avoided. Note this is a should and not a shall. Therefore it is only a recommendation. And BTW, it's been the same in every edition of the Manual since at least 1971.

Also, the FHWA is a bunch of hypocrites. In the very same 2023 Manual they have graphics of signs showing both road name and city name in the same mixed case lettering on the same sign. See pages 358 and 371. Page 358 shows the common practice of New York DOT Region-10 on Long Island where street and city names have been signed together for over 60 years that I've been watching this stuff.

Not to mention that NJDOT always used them both while underlining the street name  above the control references in which personally I like to make the sign more readable at fast speeds. That practice does a great job of separation of two different signing natures and a shame other states don't adopt that practice.

In essence when you have both written out with no separation it takes a half a second to notice the difference.  A good example is Route 440 NB at Smith Street ( Keasbey Ramp) where you have  written out:
Smith St.
Industrial Ave.
Fords

That takes an extra second to distinguish that Fords is a control city and not a third street.

If they only put a rule between the second street name and the unincorporated Fords it would make it readable at a quick glance.

[roadman65]

Disagree, the Parkway shield literally says Parkway in there. Theres no need to write it out as "Garden State Parkway", waste of money IMO.

I do think they should continue to write out NJ Turnpike however, as the turnpike text is very tiny and not really visible. But the thing I dont understand is why are they writing out it as "New Jersey Turnpike" - everyone knows about state abbreviations, seems like a waste to write it all out.

The Parkway should be written as GS Parkway and the Turnpike as NJ Turnpike. A common sense solution that won't take up excessive space or incur excessive cost......... And I still say the problem is those Parkway shields don't contrast well with the green background of the signs and don't stand out the way a red, white and blue Interstate shield does or even a white state or US highway shield does.

I think the real problem is that there is nothing on the shield that stands out to non-local drivers the way a large number does for numbered routes. So yes, some sort of written out "GS Parkway" is necessary, but a control city would be useful as well, in addition to that.

Try reading this at high speeds.
https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york390/ny-390_nb_exit_027a_02.jpg


Courtesy AA Roads
Lake Ontario State Parkway is too small with a shield maybe locals know, but anyone outside that part of New York wouldn't be familiar.

[SignBridge]

I completely agree roadman65. We have the same problem on Long Island with the special shields that NYS DOT created for the Long Island State Parkways. I imagine drivers from out of the region may find them totally perplexing though being black and white they contrast better than the ones in your photo above.

[Rothman]

What other road could it possibly be?

[jeffandnicole]

I completely agree roadman65. We have the same problem on Long Island with the special shields that NYS DOT created for the Long Island State Parkways. I imagine drivers from out of the region may find them totally perplexing though being black and white they contrast better than the ones in your photo above.

But have you noticed additional congestion or last moment lane changes?  Meaning, above and beyond what is seen at typical interchanges with proper MUTCD signage where people merge at the last moment.

[roadman65]

The Garden State Parkway shield is much easier to read than the NY Parkway shields especially the Lake Ontario shields.

[storm2k]

The Daily Record has a very nice retrospective on Route 46 and its history across the state. Very worthwhile read, and they have some great historical pictures, including signage at the 23/46/80 interchange from before 80 was open.

[chrisg69911]

Is there a reason Newark has absolutely horrible traffic/roadway design choices, or it is just because Newark is Newark.
Today I saw this sign, which is borderline deadly.
Broadway exists, which used to have two lanes, but after repaving, years ago, the lines haven't gone back down. Driving here is a mess, consensus seems to be two lanes, but buses and trucks just ride in the middle, which causes people to drive over the double yellow to pass them.
These lights and road markings are a mess, and these lights have at least 2 bulbs out for each arm, one having only 2 out of 4 signals being operational.
This whole intersection has the left arrow and green lights backwards.
The onramp to 280 is closed so this middle lane had its paint stripped, but nothing put back, so people use it as a dual left turn, but no one in the left lane is expecting it, saw some very close near misses.
I could show a bunch more examples, but I have never seen this many major (some not) issue in one place

[SignBridge]

Yeah......there are times and places where New Jersey seems to run a close second to Massachusetts......

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Is there a reason Newark has absolutely horrible traffic/roadway design choices, or it is just because Newark is Newark.
Today I saw this sign, which is borderline deadly.
Broadway exists, which used to have two lanes, but after repaving, years ago, the lines haven't gone back down. Driving here is a mess, consensus seems to be two lanes, but buses and trucks just ride in the middle, which causes people to drive over the double yellow to pass them.
These lights and road markings are a mess, and these lights have at least 2 bulbs out for each arm, one having only 2 out of 4 signals being operational.
This whole intersection has the left arrow and green lights backwards.
The onramp to 280 is closed so this middle lane had its paint stripped, but nothing put back, so people use it as a dual left turn, but no one in the left lane is expecting it, saw some very close near misses.
I could show a bunch more examples, but I have never seen this many major (some not) issue in one place

Newark has much bigger problems than road markings and signs.

[Rothman]

Is there a reason Newark has absolutely horrible traffic/roadway design choices, or it is just because Newark is Newark.
Today I saw this sign, which is borderline deadly.
Broadway exists, which used to have two lanes, but after repaving, years ago, the lines haven't gone back down. Driving here is a mess, consensus seems to be two lanes, but buses and trucks just ride in the middle, which causes people to drive over the double yellow to pass them.
These lights and road markings are a mess, and these lights have at least 2 bulbs out for each arm, one having only 2 out of 4 signals being operational.
This whole intersection has the left arrow and green lights backwards.
The onramp to 280 is closed so this middle lane had its paint stripped, but nothing put back, so people use it as a dual left turn, but no one in the left lane is expecting it, saw some very close near misses.
I could show a bunch more examples, but I have never seen this many major (some not) issue in one place

Newark has much bigger problems than road markings and signs.

Especially now that Chris' Red Hots moved out to Verona.

[storm2k]

Is there a reason Newark has absolutely horrible traffic/roadway design choices, or it is just because Newark is Newark.
Today I saw this sign, which is borderline deadly.
Broadway exists, which used to have two lanes, but after repaving, years ago, the lines haven't gone back down. Driving here is a mess, consensus seems to be two lanes, but buses and trucks just ride in the middle, which causes people to drive over the double yellow to pass them.
These lights and road markings are a mess, and these lights have at least 2 bulbs out for each arm, one having only 2 out of 4 signals being operational.
This whole intersection has the left arrow and green lights backwards.
The onramp to 280 is closed so this middle lane had its paint stripped, but nothing put back, so people use it as a dual left turn, but no one in the left lane is expecting it, saw some very close near misses.
I could show a bunch more examples, but I have never seen this many major (some not) issue in one place

It's an older city, it's a depressed city, and you have three agencies that have ownership here (the city, Essex County, and NJDOT). It's not a great combination.

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/88E5hW8CWz4EYsAY7
This is a surprise. Signs directing eastbound I-280 motorists to use Exit 15 ( Route 21) for Newark Airport.

Usually they would send you by freeway and that would be I-95 on the tolled turnpike from the end of this particular route.

However can a driver read the tab below the airport emblem?  Not to mention the Exit 15 ramp has no airport follow up signs either.

Then this:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/hTqnGYmdiF4WPDWP9

The WB I-280 Exit 15 ramp forgot to include Belleville on the NJ 21 NB guide.  Belleville is one of the two control cities for Exit 15 and should be posted here. Newark is the other control city, but considering both north and south NJ 21 serve Newark,  an exception can be made here. However, a city should be signed to its Downtown wich is via NJ 21 SB to the right.

Oh, and don't get me started on the dinky LGS for WB Exit 13 on I-280 instead of standard freeway signs that were once installed there.

NJDOT don't like to do special projects including adding exit numbers to freeway guides. It wasn't until the mid nineties when NJDOT added exit numbers to the Clinton Street and Garden State Parkway exits in East Orange several years after the other I-280 exits had them installed.   For years those had no way of referencing the exits by number like all exits west and east of East Orange have had.  Only when NJDOT thought the Clinton/ Parkway guides got too old for use did they give Clinton Exit 12A and the GSP Exit 12B.

I grew up in NJ and remember how badly the state signed exits and especially Route shields.  They need to set a budget and allow for old signs and for other miscellaneous things too to get funded.

[bmitchelf]

Is there a reason Newark has absolutely horrible traffic/roadway design choices, or it is just because Newark is Newark.
Today I saw this sign, which is borderline deadly.

The GSV history of that first sign is wild.

I was noticing how when you travel SB on US 9W in Fort Lee you can't access SB I-95 due to a left turn prohibition at the ramp to I-95 SB.

Instead your directed to US 1/9/46 SB to travel three miles to reach SB I-95 and WB I-80 via US 46 after the split with US 1-9.

I figure a left turn lane and protected signal phase can be added without disrupting traffic flow. When NB 9W to Route 4 turns green they could allow SB 9W to turn left to I-95 SB simultaneously as it is directly opposite the turn.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/9b9AHz277XZczuwB6

Also they need a SOUTH header for I-95 as US 46 is not to I-95 NB as the ramp to I-95 NB ( to the GWB) is beyond the turn for US 1/9/46 on the left.

It looks like they don't want you to know you can get on I-95 NB there

When was the last time you read "Interstate" in the Interstate shield?

But the shield itself is blue, not green

[RobbieL2415]

(For NJ 15)  Route 15 bridge in Morris County temporarily closes over concerns of structural integrity (closure is indefinite)

It's Beasley's Point Bridge 2, Electric Boogaloo.

[74/171FAN]

By the way, the NJ 15 bridge apparently reopened Sunday afternoon. Temporary bridge for now.

It has reopened....

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/sK2PYgDazZybSzjX9
Are right turns into the crossover on the right here allowed considering the sign on the left states: NO TURNS?

However, the NO TURNS sign is a New Jersey thing at all ramp merges so it could mean for traffic entering Route 495 here don't turn into traffic on the freeway and for 495 traffic not to turn into the traffic merging.

Plus does anyone know why that road on the right even exists?

[chrisg69911]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/sK2PYgDazZybSzjX9
Are right turns into the crossover on the right here allowed considering the sign on the left states: NO TURNS?

However, the NO TURNS sign is a New Jersey thing at all ramp merges so it could mean for traffic entering Route 495 here don't turn into traffic on the freeway and for 495 traffic not to turn into the traffic merging.

Plus does anyone know why that road on the right even exists?

The google car used it here, but I think its just there if anyone last minute doesn't want to use the tunnel. If it weren't allowed there would/should be do not enter signs on both sides. It could also be used for quick access for the PAPD since their station is right across the street.

[SignBridge]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/sK2PYgDazZybSzjX9
Are right turns into the crossover on the right here allowed considering the sign on the left states: NO TURNS?

However, the NO TURNS sign is a New Jersey thing at all ramp merges so it could mean for traffic entering Route 495 here don't turn into traffic on the freeway and for 495 traffic not to turn into the traffic merging.

Plus does anyone know why that road on the right even exists?

The google car used it here, but I think its just there if anyone last minute doesn't want to use the tunnel. If it weren't allowed there would/should be do not enter signs on both sides. It could also be used for quick access for the PAPD since their station is right across the street.

The road on the right is a through county road and was probably there long before the Lincoln Tunnel was even built. And the building across the street is the Port Authority's Lincoln Tunnel Administration Building.