New Jersey

[roadman65]

Its a nice change I must say.  I do miss the old, but life goes on and the way NJ is doing it is so cool!

[Mergingtraffic]

They're even replacing these:

[roadman65]

I see Exit 2 on the Turnpike uses typical NJDOT sign for US 322 after the toll.  The format with the US 322 shield on top with the two directions long side of it with arrows pointing either way.  Then beneath it is features the control cities for both left and right in individual boxes.

[J3ebrules]

Someone posted this glorious image of downtown Cranford from 1930 on the /r/newjersey Reddit today, back when Route 22 ran through town and was signed alongside Route 28. Check out those awesome old school shields.

You know, every so often nj.com posts photos like this one. My favorite vintage photo gallery is, of course, the photos and roads one! Check these out - they're fantastic! https://www.nj.com/news/2016/01/vintage_photos_of_streets_and_roads_in_nj.html

[roadman65]

Great shot of the original Cranford Train Station.  It originally did not have a platform, and was one where the steps under the door had to come down and you had to climb up to reach the train.  Most likely the old blue coach cars without AC were in use at the time of the photo.

CNJ used navy blue with gold trim as their official color as I remember as a kid and from the old photos.

[Roadgeek Adam]

Signage was orange though. Equipment was Blue/Gold

[jeffandnicole]

New Jersey published their 2018 speed monitoring data last month:  https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/roadway/pdf/wim/18_Classdata_spd.pdf

Of the 65 mph highways, the highest 85 percentile speed shown is 83 mph on a few occasions, such as on I-80.  I-295 near Exit 15 wins the award for the consistently highest 85th percentile speed, at 81 or 82 mph for much of the year.  This monitoring station also had the highest percentage at 10+ over the limit, with consistently 40% or more of traffic driving in excess of 10 mph over the limit.

There was one outlier on I-287, which gave a 93 mph 85th percentile speed.  Based on the other data presented, this was just a reporting error as only 3% of the traffic was reported to be going over 75 mph (which in of itself appears to be lower than what it should be compared to most other months).

Some of the speed monitoring data is missing, usually due to operational issues.  On I-295, two monitoring stations show no data for much of the year, but I believe a repaving project probably took those stations out.

[tolbs17]

And I have a question. In New Jersey why does the people work at gas stations fill your car and you can't do it? Is it to prevent carjackings or some idiot trying to play around with them? I don't know. I don't live there but I find it interesting that this state only has this law on the gas stations.

[jeffandnicole]

And I have a question. In New Jersey why does the people work at gas stations fill your car and you can't do it? Is it to prevent carjackings or some idiot trying to play around with them? I don't know. I don't live there but I find it interesting that this state only has this law on the gas stations.

It's been the law for decades. Lot of people think it's just to keep jobs for people. I don't know if there's any one true answer. Oregon had a similar law, although thry recently reduced it and there is some self-serve stations out there now.

[tolbs17]

And I have a question. In New Jersey why does the people work at gas stations fill your car and you can't do it? Is it to prevent carjackings or some idiot trying to play around with them? I don't know. I don't live there but I find it interesting that this state only has this law on the gas stations.

It's been the law for decades. Lot of people think it's just to keep jobs for people. I don't know if there's any one true answer. Oregon had a similar law, although thry recently reduced it and there is some self-serve stations out there now.

So not all of Oregon is self serve? Just some? I find that interesting.

[jeffandnicole]

https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-jersey/jersey-shore-townsends-inlet-bridge-sea-isle-city-avalon-cape-may-county-20190726.html

The Townsends Inlet Bridge between Sea Isle and Avalon, closed since September to fully replace parts of the bridge, reopened yesterday. 

Entire pieces of the structure were replaced on the Avalon side.

[PHLBOS]

And I have a question. In New Jersey why does the people work at gas stations fill your car and you can't do it? Is it to prevent carjackings or some idiot trying to play around with them? I don't know. I don't live there but I find it interesting that this state only has this law on the gas stations.

It's been the law for decades. Lot of people think it's just to keep jobs for people. I don't know if there's any one true answer. Oregon had a similar law, although thry recently reduced it and there is some self-serve stations out there now.

So not all of Oregon is self serve? Just some? I find that interesting.

Up until recently (a few years ago), Oregon was very much like NJ in terms of not allowing self-service.

Generally, efforts to bring self-service into NJ do periodically come up every now & then; but such legislation either dies while in committee or, should such survive that hurdle, doesn't receive enough votes to pass/get approved.

NJ's ban on patrons pumping their own gas dates back to 1949.  Self-service, as we know it, didn't come about until the 1970s.

IIRC, the original reasoning behind NJ's (I can't speak for Oregon) long-standing ban was initially for safety reasons due to gasoline being flammable.  Guess on my part: since a much higher percentage of the adult population smoked when the law first took effect; the possibility of a non-employee with a lit cigarette in one's mouth being in close proximity to the gas pumps, despite any smoking prohibition signage posted, was real.

[roadman65]

The energy crisis of the 1070's (the very one the auto makers forgot that happened when they made the SUV and Minivan) created the self serve system.  It was all the states adopted it but NJ never did just like all the states adopted the RTOR law except the section of New York State known as the Five Boroughs which keeps the old way of stopping at red lights as it was before.

[noelbotevera]

The energy crisis of the 1070's (the very one the auto makers forgot that happened when they made the SUV and Minivan) created the self serve system.  It was all the states adopted it but NJ never did just like all the states adopted the RTOR law except the section of New York State known as the Five Boroughs which keeps the old way of stopping at red lights as it was before.

Ah yes, I see that the Battle of Hastings truly had dire consequences on the events of human history. I'm sure that the English preferred the sedan, if I recall correctly.

[PHLBOS]

^^Noelbotevera, you beat me to it.
Nonetheless:

The energy crisis of the 1070's

1070s? 

I knew you meant 1970s; but IMHO, that typo was begging for light-hearted rebuttals.

(the very one the auto makers forgot that happened when they made the SUV and Minivan)

Yes & no. 

Not to hijack/derail this thread; but one reason why the minivan, SUV, then later CUV & 4-door pick-ups were/are aggressively marketed to the buying public was due to the CAFE standards (initially enacted as a result of the 1973-74 gas price spikes & related-long pump lines) making such cost prohibitive for automakers to produce larger cars that could actually hold passengers comfortably for long trips and/or do heavy-duty towing.  Most of today's sedans, even the larger ones, skimp on headroom for rear-seat passengers due to their more aerodynamic rooflines (as a means of improving fuel efficiency).  Additionally, most if not of them are also too narrow to offer realisticly three-across seating per row for the second row/rear seat.

That said, yes I do believe that the manufacturers who are phasing out/discontinuing their car lines in favor of offereing more SUV/CUV/truck lines are being penny-wise/dollar-foolish ; but, playing devil's advocate here, what else are they going to do to offer what the majority of their customers are asking/demanding for?

[noelbotevera]

Hate to further derail the previous discussion, but I recall seeing this sign when traveling up to Boston last month.

I don't even understand the point of it for several reasons: for one, it's wrong; NJ 17 North merges beyond the Exit 66 ramp, and it's definitely less than a mile away. For two, if this is referring to NY 17...well, that's slightly more understandable, since the NY state line and thus NY 17 are a mile away. But really, if it's guiding motorists to the NY 17 freeway or even NY 17 on its own, then those destinations are definitely more than a mile away, and really it should say something like "NY 17 NORTH USE I-87" or "KEEP LEFT".

[jeffandnicole]

Hate to further derail the previous discussion, but I recall seeing this sign when traveling up to Boston last month.

I don't even understand the point of it for several reasons: for one, it's wrong; NJ 17 North merges beyond the Exit 66 ramp, and it's definitely less than a mile away. For two, if this is referring to NY 17...well, that's slightly more understandable, since the NY state line and thus NY 17 are a mile away. But really, if it's guiding motorists to the NY 17 freeway or even NY 17 on its own, then those destinations are definitely more than a mile away, and really it should say something like "NY 17 NORTH USE I-87" or "KEEP LEFT".

The better option would be to combine it with the pull-thru sign, to read:

   NORTH               TO
287 (NY)17      87 (thruway)

             ALBANY

[PHLBOS]

Not that I condone such, but it's not unusual for states to use their own shield for a route that's not in their state.  What makes this location/scenario more interesting/unique is that the state route in question merges with the main highway (I-287 in this case), runs concurrent w/I-287 into the adjacent state (NY) & then runs concurrent w/I-87 northbound prior to exiting.

I do agree that J&N's suggested pull-through revision would clear things up a bit.  If NJDOT can not find nor doesn't want to use a NY State route shield; they could always go old-school with NY 17 wording but MUTCD would, no doubt, frown on such practice.

[famartin]

Hate to further derail the previous discussion, but I recall seeing this sign when traveling up to Boston last month.

I don't even understand the point of it for several reasons: for one, it's wrong; NJ 17 North merges beyond the Exit 66 ramp, and it's definitely less than a mile away. For two, if this is referring to NY 17...well, that's slightly more understandable, since the NY state line and thus NY 17 are a mile away. But really, if it's guiding motorists to the NY 17 freeway or even NY 17 on its own, then those destinations are definitely more than a mile away, and really it should say something like "NY 17 NORTH USE I-87" or "KEEP LEFT".

The better option would be to combine it with the pull-thru sign, to read:

   NORTH               TO
287 (NY)17      87 (thruway)

             ALBANY

Technically its NJ 17 for a short stretch, so I think it would be fine to sign it with the NJ shield there. And maybe use Westchester White Plains or Rye in addition to Albany (for the 287 east control city), but otherwise agree.

[famartin]

Not that I condone such, but it's not unusual for states to use their own shield for a route that's not in their state.  What makes this location/scenario more interesting/unique is that the state route in question merges with the main highway (I-287 in this case), runs concurrent w/I-287 into the adjacent state (NY) & then runs concurrent w/I-87 northbound prior to exiting.

I do agree that J&N's suggested pull-through revision would clear things up a bit.  If NJDOT can not find nor doesn't want to use a NY State route shield; they could always go old-school with NY 17 wording but MUTCD would, no doubt, frown on such practice.

The old NJDOT would have likely used a backplated NY route shield, but now, I'm sure it would be normal. I think they could just use the NJ route shield though since technically they merge before the state line. 

I recall that PennDOT uses an NJ 90 shield on I-95, complete with backplate. I'm guessing they got it from NJDOT. 
https://goo.gl/maps/QwhS5RmRLhw733Sq5

They also used NJ 29 on I-295, but no backplate. That could be DRJTBC signage, though...

[jeffandnicole]

Shields are custom made for each job.  They just specify in the contractor bid papers what they want, and how it should be designed, including lettering type, size, space, etc.  PA or the contractor for their construction projects can easily create a NJ, NY, MD or Ohio shield just by knowing the shield measurements.

And, to repeat, NJ is not using backplates anymore.  Most signs installed over the past few years do not have backplates.  The I-95 NJ 90 sign was probably installed in the 1990's: The Exit tab has a greenover for the new exit number when PennDOT changed to mileage based exit numbers in the early 2000's.

[PHLBOS]

Hate to further derail the previous discussion, but I recall seeing this sign when traveling up to Boston last month.

I don't even understand the point of it for several reasons: for one, it's wrong; NJ 17 North merges beyond the Exit 66 ramp, and it's definitely less than a mile away. For two, if this is referring to NY 17...well, that's slightly more understandable, since the NY state line and thus NY 17 are a mile away. But really, if it's guiding motorists to the NY 17 freeway or even NY 17 on its own, then those destinations are definitely more than a mile away, and really it should say something like "NY 17 NORTH USE I-87" or "KEEP LEFT".

The better option would be to combine it with the pull-thru sign, to read:

   NORTH               TO
287 (NY)17      87 (thruway)

             ALBANY

Technically its NJ 17 for a short stretch, so I think it would be fine to sign it with the NJ shield there. And maybe use Westchester White Plains or Rye in addition to Albany (for the 287 east control city), but otherwise agree.

Agree regarding just using the NJ 17 shield for J&N's pull-through.  Since White Plains is an approved/used I-287 control city and is closer to this location than Rye; I would use the former over the latter.  Either that or just use the current N Y Thruway listing since such covers all three routes (I-87/287 & SR 17).  Heck, one could just use the same panel and move the I-287 shield and place the NJ 17 shield right next to it.  FWIW, the NJ 17 northbound exit (15A) off I-87 northbound is at least 2 miles from Exit 66.

I recall that PennDOT uses an NJ 90 shield on I-95, complete with backplate. I'm guessing they got it from NJDOT. 
https://goo.gl/maps/QwhS5RmRLhw733Sq5

Either that or, since it's also generic MUTCD state route shield, such was probably fabricated per MUTCD specs.  That particular panel dates back to 2000 (prior to NJDOT using shields without black backplates on sign panels) when the Aramingo Ave. ramps were added to the interchange.  The exit number was changed not too long after these panels were erected.  Prior signage gave no reference to NJ 90.

Later signs feature round shields w/no black backplates but w/Clearview numerals, like this abomination.  Such is beyond DRPA's jurisdiction, so it's clearly a PennDOT install.  Not sure what happened there.

They also used NJ 29 on I-295, but no backplate. That could be DRJTBC signage, though...

If you're referring to this long-gone sign & gantry along then-I-95; that's a PennDOT install.  Such is clearly outside of DRJTBC's jurisdiction.  The adjacent 2-mile advance BGS for then-Exit 2 is a NJDOT spec'd sign that was added years later, note the absence of lights for such.

[bzakharin]

And I have a question. In New Jersey why does the people work at gas stations fill your car and you can't do it? Is it to prevent carjackings or some idiot trying to play around with them? I don't know. I don't live there but I find it interesting that this state only has this law on the gas stations.

It's been the law for decades. Lot of people think it's just to keep jobs for people. I don't know if there's any one true answer. Oregon had a similar law, although thry recently reduced it and there is some self-serve stations out there now.

It was politics, plain and simple. I think I first saw the link on this very forum somewhere, but can't be sure
https://www.nj.com/opinion/2014/02/the_real_reason_self-service_gas_was_banned_in_nj_corruption_not_safety.html

[famartin]

Hate to further derail the previous discussion, but I recall seeing this sign when traveling up to Boston last month.

I don't even understand the point of it for several reasons: for one, it's wrong; NJ 17 North merges beyond the Exit 66 ramp, and it's definitely less than a mile away. For two, if this is referring to NY 17...well, that's slightly more understandable, since the NY state line and thus NY 17 are a mile away. But really, if it's guiding motorists to the NY 17 freeway or even NY 17 on its own, then those destinations are definitely more than a mile away, and really it should say something like "NY 17 NORTH USE I-87" or "KEEP LEFT".

The better option would be to combine it with the pull-thru sign, to read:

   NORTH               TO
287 (NY)17      87 (thruway)

             ALBANY

Technically its NJ 17 for a short stretch, so I think it would be fine to sign it with the NJ shield there. And maybe use Westchester White Plains or Rye in addition to Albany (for the 287 east control city), but otherwise agree.

Agree regarding just using the NJ 17 shield for J&N's pull-through.  Since White Plains is an approved/used I-287 control city and is closer to this location than Rye; I would use the former over the latter.  Either that or just use the current N Y Thruway listing since such covers all three routes (I-87/287 & SR 17).  Heck, one could just use the same panel and move the I-287 shield and place the NJ 17 shield right next to it.  FWIW, the NJ 17 northbound exit (15A) off I-87 northbound is at least 2 miles from Exit 66.

I recall that PennDOT uses an NJ 90 shield on I-95, complete with backplate. I'm guessing they got it from NJDOT. 
https://goo.gl/maps/QwhS5RmRLhw733Sq5

Either that or, since it's also generic MUTCD state route shield, such was probably fabricated per MUTCD specs.  That particular panel dates back to 2000 (prior to NJDOT using shields without black backplates on sign panels) when the Aramingo Ave. ramps were added to the interchange.  The exit number was changed not too long after these panels were erected.  Prior signage gave no reference to NJ 90.

Later signs feature round shields w/no black backplates but w/Clearview numerals, like this abomination.  Such is beyond DRPA's jurisdiction, so it's clearly a PennDOT install.  Not sure what happened there.

They also used NJ 29 on I-295, but no backplate. That could be DRJTBC signage, though...

If you're referring to this long-gone sign & gantry along then-I-95; that's a PennDOT install.  Such is clearly outside of DRJTBC's jurisdiction.  The adjacent 2-mile advance BGS for then-Exit 2 is a NJDOT spec'd sign that was added years later, note the absence of lights for such.

Yup that's the one.

They could just say NY Thruway on the 287 sign discussed above, but I like Jeff's idea of using the trailblazer for the thruway and actual cities, esp since that's what MUTCD prefers now.

[odditude]

this abomination

oh god my eyes