New Jersey

[roadman65]

Almost all the signage on the freeway part of 202 from East Amwell to the New Hope toll bridge has been replaced. I will go through when it's not raining to get pictures. One note of interest is that the signs for the Mount Airy/Dilts Corner exit now has CR-605 shields on it. Here's the SB one, which Google already picked up for SV. This is even more complicated than needed as no one needs to care about "Frontage Road to". It's just extra noise that doesn't help motorists find their way. But I guess this means that CR shields are getting signed now whether they're 5xx or 6xx routes. Also of interest is that they spelled out Pennsylvania instead of just going with New Hope PA.

https://goo.gl/maps/jaUtdvvoyQvU1pSb8 Well at least they got rid of the ground mount toll bridge sign for it now being on the pull through making the old ground and overhead a combined effort to convey it all in one sign.  Though having the town of New Hope and the state it's in as two separate control cities is a second new one after the former signage on I-95 for the Betsy Ross Bridge in Philadelphia. Remember when the control cities there were both Pennsauken and New Jersey?

[storm2k]

Almost all the signage on the freeway part of 202 from East Amwell to the New Hope toll bridge has been replaced. I will go through when it's not raining to get pictures. One note of interest is that the signs for the Mount Airy/Dilts Corner exit now has CR-605 shields on it. Here's the SB one, which Google already picked up for SV. This is even more complicated than needed as no one needs to care about "Frontage Road to". It's just extra noise that doesn't help motorists find their way. But I guess this means that CR shields are getting signed now whether they're 5xx or 6xx routes. Also of interest is that they spelled out Pennsylvania instead of just going with New Hope PA.

https://goo.gl/maps/jaUtdvvoyQvU1pSb8 Well at least they got rid of the ground mount toll bridge sign for it now being on the pull through making the old ground and overhead a combined effort to convey it all in one sign.  Though having the town of New Hope and the state it's in as two separate control cities is a second new one after the former signage on I-95 for the Betsy Ross Bridge in Philadelphia. Remember when the control cities there were both Pennsauken and New Jersey?

That particular assembly remains as you can see they replaced the overhead structure a few years ago (standard box truss not the older triangle truss). The newer box truss assemblies were not touched, just the ones on the older triangle trusses from the 1970s that are the focus of replacement across the state right now.

[roadman65]

That particular sign writing technique there at Mount Airy needs to be used EB on I-78:at Exits 11 and 12 which are signed for Route 173 in which both EB ramps do not  directly connect to Route 173. You have to use local Hunderton 600 routes over the freeway to reach that route.

Exit 12 shouldn't be even using Route 173 as the main focus when Perrinville Road should be as Jutland and Norton are both served by them and not NJ 173.

IMO NJ 173 is a bit redundant as 4 consecutive exits are signed for that highway. However Exits 11 and 12 do not need to be signed at all for it. Also West Portal going Eastbound at Exit 11 is a waste and irrelevant to the needs of motorists as well. Exit 7 already was signed for it and is unincorporated within Bethlehem Township.  In fact prior to 1982, only Pattenburg was used at Exit 11 (then it wasn't Exit 11 as NJDOT wasn't using exit numbers) without West Portal traveling Eastbound and NJ 173 was not at all signed.

[roadman65]

Was there any modifications made in Pt. Pleasant Beach at the NJ 35 and Broadway intersection?

I remember, when I lived up there a different set up was in effect for SB Route 35 to EB Broadway.  The u turn to the north you had to make ( as Broadway only turns from the NB lanes) seemed quite different now then previously. 

[storm2k]

That particular sign writing technique there at Mount Airy needs to be used EB on I-78:at Exits 11 and 12 which are signed for Route 173 in which both EB ramps do not  directly connect to Route 173. You have to use local Hunderton 600 routes over the freeway to reach that route.

Exit 12 shouldn't be even using Route 173 as the main focus when Perrinville Road should be as Jutland and Norton are both served by them and not NJ 173.

IMO NJ 173 is a bit redundant as 4 consecutive exits are signed for that highway. However Exits 11 and 12 do not need to be signed at all for it. Also West Portal going Eastbound at Exit 11 is a waste and irrelevant to the needs of motorists as well. Exit 7 already was signed for it and is unincorporated within Bethlehem Township.  In fact prior to 1982, only Pattenburg was used at Exit 11 (then it wasn't Exit 11 as NJDOT wasn't using exit numbers) without West Portal traveling Eastbound and NJ 173 was not at all signed.

That's easily solved by putting a "To" in front of the 173 shield and then having reassurance shields to direct motorists once they exit.

[roadman65]

My point is why bother sign it at all.  In that case green it out.  However, wait and see what NJDOT has planned for replacement signage and it will most likely read the 600 route to NJ 173 at Exit 11 and Frontage Road To 600 route to NJ 173 for Jutland and Norton.

BTW those signs coming off the Outerbridge Crossing for NJ 440 at NJ 35 are beyond bad.  So much information and most of it not needed, but the big issue is arrangement of all the shields to make it hard to read.

[storm2k]

My point is why bother sign it at all.  In that case green it out.  However, wait and see what NJDOT has planned for replacement signage and it will most likely read the 600 route to NJ 173 at Exit 11 and Frontage Road To 600 route to NJ 173 for Jutland and Norton.

BTW those signs coming off the Outerbridge Crossing for NJ 440 at NJ 35 are beyond bad.  So much information and most of it not needed, but the big issue is arrangement of all the shields to make it hard to read.

Agreed re: the 440 signs. Pick one or two routes (maybe 95/Turnpike) and move the rest to aux signs or just let their exits come up.

[TheGrassGuy]

Is it true that Exits 69-72 on the GW Bridge Approach are really from I-95's exit mileage (had the Somerset Freeway been built) and not I-80's, and the similarity in numbering is only a coincidence?

[bzakharin]

Is it true that Exits 69-72 on the GW Bridge Approach are really from I-95's exit mileage (had the Somerset Freeway been built) and not I-80's, and the similarity in numbering is only a coincidence?

Yes, in fact, Exit 68 is south of I-80
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8520973,-74.0148446,3a,75y,19.28h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sweOad5jo8s6a8EiGbl3ihA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8500241,-74.016821,3a,75y,183.69h,80.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz7a_9dEyjdB4vVsJFbhYLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[famartin]

http://www.raymondcmartinjr.com/njfreeways/95_original_NJ.png

[storm2k]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

Whatever font that "2" is in, it's not FHWA

[ixnay]

Why the truck restriction in the NJ 29 tunnel?  I've never known of weight restrictions in a tunnel.

[ixnay]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

Whatever font that "2" is in, it's not FHWA

And capitalization wise they flubbed the "NORTH TO" on the Browning Rd./Marlton Pike sign too.

[famartin]

Why the truck restriction in the NJ 29 tunnel?  I've never known of weight restrictions in a tunnel.

Local complaints about truck traffic.

[Mergingtraffic]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

[famartin]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

Yes, but NJDOT has plenty of signs more than 20 years old, so "supposed" versus "reality" are two very different things.

[ixnay]

Why the truck restriction in the NJ 29 tunnel?  I've never known of weight restrictions in a tunnel.

Local complaints about truck traffic.

Just about all of NJ 29 is verboten to rigs.   Just like the Pulaski Skyway.

Here's a map of NJ's truck routes.

https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/freight/trucking/pdf/largetruckmap.pdf

[Alps]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

Yes, but NJDOT has plenty of signs more than 20 years old, so "supposed" versus "reality" are two very different things.

Signs are supposed to only last 10 years. You are supposed to test them to ascertain at what point they lose minimum standards of retroreflectivity, but supposedly the average is in the 10-12 year range. Signs out there more than 20 years typically do not meet minimums.

[famartin]

[tweet]1524833038466686976[/tweet]

Video from NJDOT about doing a sign replacement. This particular one is on 295. Kind of neat to see this in video action.

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

Yes, but NJDOT has plenty of signs more than 20 years old, so "supposed" versus "reality" are two very different things.

Signs are supposed to only last 10 years. You are supposed to test them to ascertain at what point they lose minimum standards of retroreflectivity, but supposedly the average is in the 10-12 year range. Signs out there more than 20 years typically do not meet minimums.

I don't disagree, but there are (or at least, were still very recently) plenty of signs from the 90s around NJDOT highways like 287.

[Alps]

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

Yes, but NJDOT has plenty of signs more than 20 years old, so "supposed" versus "reality" are two very different things.

Signs are supposed to only last 10 years. You are supposed to test them to ascertain at what point they lose minimum standards of retroreflectivity, but supposedly the average is in the 10-12 year range. Signs out there more than 20 years typically do not meet minimums.

I don't disagree, but there are (or at least, were still very recently) plenty of signs from the 90s around NJDOT highways like 287.

I know, but they're really showing their age.

[famartin]

He said signs are only supposed to last 10 years!? That's it??  NJ can make their own extruded aluminum signs? CT can't.  They have to contract it out.

Yes, but NJDOT has plenty of signs more than 20 years old, so "supposed" versus "reality" are two very different things.

Signs are supposed to only last 10 years. You are supposed to test them to ascertain at what point they lose minimum standards of retroreflectivity, but supposedly the average is in the 10-12 year range. Signs out there more than 20 years typically do not meet minimums.

I don't disagree, but there are (or at least, were still very recently) plenty of signs from the 90s around NJDOT highways like 287.

I know, but they're really showing their age.

Again, don't disagree.  I was just saying that their "life expectancy" doesn't align with what they actually do in the field. Signs might be designed for 10 years, but are routinely left in service for over 20, regardless of whether they meet minimums or not.

[storm2k]

Pretty amazing, actually because most of the signs on 287 north of Exit 14 were installed between 1993-97. The only real replacements were right around Exit 41 for Rt 80 which are much newer but suffering from terrible UV fading on the interstate shields. Signs from 13 down to the Turnpike were pretty much all installed in 1998 (except for the Exit 8 signs which were from around 1994). I've felt like they've held up fine for the most part. NJDOT has done very few replacements over the years, save for signs that got mauled in accidents (except, it seems, for the ground mounts approaching Exit 10 going SB, which have been knocked over multiple times over the years and just put back up) and a couple of overhead structures they needed to replace. I expect that we'll get at least one new sign for Exit 10 NB since the old one was bridge mounted to the River Rd overpass and was taken down. I wonder if a broader signage project is going to eventually be in the works for 287 given that at the northern end of the roadway, most of those signs are rapidly approaching 30 years of age.

[MATraveler128]

Pretty amazing, actually because most of the signs on 287 north of Exit 14 were installed between 1993-97. The only real replacements were right around Exit 41 for Rt 80 which are much newer but suffering from terrible UV fading on the interstate shields. Signs from 13 down to the Turnpike were pretty much all installed in 1998 (except for the Exit 8 signs which were from around 1994). I've felt like they've held up fine for the most part. NJDOT has done very few replacements over the years, save for signs that got mauled in accidents (except, it seems, for the ground mounts approaching Exit 10 going SB, which have been knocked over multiple times over the years and just put back up) and a couple of overhead structures they needed to replace. I expect that we'll get at least one new sign for Exit 10 NB since the old one was bridge mounted to the River Rd overpass and was taken down. I wonder if a broader signage project is going to eventually be in the works for 287 given that at the northern end of the roadway, most of those signs are rapidly approaching 30 years of age.

I mean, the signs for Exit 66 are button copy, so it's likely that those are nearing the end of their lifespan. I forget if the rest of the signs are button copy between NJ 208 and the New York border. Then there is this faded non MUTCD compliant auxiliary sign for I-84 that will probably come down sadly.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0898561,-74.1682396,3a,46.9y,17.11h,90.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4WIMngOpMwR-QYQwifSiMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[NJRoadfan]

That I-84 sign isn't even NJDOT, looks like NYSTA put that up. The rounded corners and post style give that away. I think the button copy on that section of I-287 dates to its opening in 1993.