News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Garden State Parkway

Started by Roadrunner75, July 30, 2014, 09:53:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

NJRoadfan

NJDOT likely produced those signs. The new signs going up seem much smaller to me. That and they have rounded corners, an uncommon sight in NJ. NJTA also seems to go with a darker green sheeting as well.


storm2k

Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 03, 2014, 11:11:52 PM
NJDOT likely produced those signs. The new signs going up seem much smaller to me. That and they have rounded corners, an uncommon sight in NJ. NJTA also seems to go with a darker green sheeting as well.

They are basically classic NJTA practices but to MUTCD standards. Turnpike signs have had rounded corners for as long as I can remember.

Alps

Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 03, 2014, 11:11:52 PM
NJDOT likely produced those signs. The new signs going up seem much smaller to me. That and they have rounded corners, an uncommon sight in NJ. NJTA also seems to go with a darker green sheeting as well.
NJ Highway Authority produced those signs, using NJDOT specs. They're instantly identifiable as NJHA designs, what with the centered exit tabs over multiple signs.
On another note, what's happening with the numbering at 131, 131A, 131B?

storm2k

Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2014, 08:34:04 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 03, 2014, 11:11:52 PM
NJDOT likely produced those signs. The new signs going up seem much smaller to me. That and they have rounded corners, an uncommon sight in NJ. NJTA also seems to go with a darker green sheeting as well.
NJ Highway Authority produced those signs, using NJDOT specs. They're instantly identifiable as NJHA designs, what with the centered exit tabs over multiple signs.
On another note, what's happening with the numbering at 131, 131A, 131B?

They already put up new gore point signs. NB 131A and 131B were replaced. At 131, they put up a new one with an obvious plaque underneath but they're still covered, which leads me to believe that they're renumbering it, either to 131C or 132. SB 131 and 131A both have new gore point signs with plaques underneath, but are still covered. If they renumber 131 as 132, they may make 131A southbound just be 131 and then 130 will become 130B-A.

Alps

Quote from: storm2k on November 04, 2014, 09:53:50 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2014, 08:34:04 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 03, 2014, 11:11:52 PM
NJDOT likely produced those signs. The new signs going up seem much smaller to me. That and they have rounded corners, an uncommon sight in NJ. NJTA also seems to go with a darker green sheeting as well.
NJ Highway Authority produced those signs, using NJDOT specs. They're instantly identifiable as NJHA designs, what with the centered exit tabs over multiple signs.
On another note, what's happening with the numbering at 131, 131A, 131B?

They already put up new gore point signs. NB 131A and 131B were replaced. At 131, they put up a new one with an obvious plaque underneath but they're still covered, which leads me to believe that they're renumbering it, either to 131C or 132. SB 131 and 131A both have new gore point signs with plaques underneath, but are still covered. If they renumber 131 as 132, they may make 131A southbound just be 131 and then 130 will become 130B-A.
I don't think 132 is happening. They've just been shuffling letters at interchanges, not numbers.

Roadrunner75

I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 


Don'tKnowYet

Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 



How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)

Roadrunner75

Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 
How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)
It's not really the 'Former' exit, since it has always been just 89.  The ramp location from the mainline for 88 is going to disappear completely in favor of it being within the C/D lanes after the toll barrier for 89.  In the short term, there's going to be a lot of angry people who 'missed' their exit when they zip past 89, expecting 88 a short distance beyond (not to mention businesses that need to reprint their marketing materials with directions on them).  But it is what it is, and I suppose 89 C/B/A is fine and makes the most sense.  Maybe a sign is warranted on the mainline where the exit used to be indicating "Former Exit 88 - Pay Attention Next Time - Next Exit 7 Miles".

sercamaro

Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C.

The Southbound gore point exit sign is now Exit 89 C - B - Covered spot for A.  The entrance/exit ramp at Airport Road now has a traffic signal (not active at this time).
"Goalies Don't Smile" -- Ken Dryden

Roadrunner75

Quote from: sercamaro on November 05, 2014, 06:51:25 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C.
The Southbound gore point exit sign is now Exit 89 C - B - Covered spot for A.  The entrance/exit ramp at Airport Road now has a traffic signal (not active at this time).
I just saw that tonight - they must have put that up in the last 24 hours or maybe I just wasn't paying attention going through yesterday.  There were a couple of VMS's noting that 88 was going to be closed on 11/10 (If I recall), and that Route 70 would now be from 89.  The mainline SB traffic currently running on the future C/D lanes is kind of tight to do what they are doing in the NB direction (3 lanes through + Jersey Barrier + single on-ramp lane from 70).   Unless they plan on pushing into the current median, it looked like there wasn't enough room to jam a barrier and an 89B lane on the right side (the new light poles were pretty close to the barrier).  I hope they don't think they're going to get away with routing Route 70 traffic via Airport Road for awhile, which will be a disaster.  I can see that for a quick overnight session of moving barriers around and restriping but nothing longer than that...


Don'tKnowYet

Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 
How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)
It's not really the 'Former' exit, since it has always been just 89.  The ramp location from the mainline for 88 is going to disappear completely in favor of it being within the C/D lanes after the toll barrier for 89.  In the short term, there's going to be a lot of angry people who 'missed' their exit when they zip past 89, expecting 88 a short distance beyond (not to mention businesses that need to reprint their marketing materials with directions on them).  But it is what it is, and I suppose 89 C/B/A is fine and makes the most sense.  Maybe a sign is warranted on the mainline where the exit used to be indicating "Former Exit 88 - Pay Attention Next Time - Next Exit 7 Miles".


In theory, the argument about missing the 88 exit holds water, but in reality it doesn't assuming the new Advance guide signs will have the NJ 70 route marker on them.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 08:49:09 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 
How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)
It's not really the 'Former' exit, since it has always been just 89.  The ramp location from the mainline for 88 is going to disappear completely in favor of it being within the C/D lanes after the toll barrier for 89.  In the short term, there's going to be a lot of angry people who 'missed' their exit when they zip past 89, expecting 88 a short distance beyond (not to mention businesses that need to reprint their marketing materials with directions on them).  But it is what it is, and I suppose 89 C/B/A is fine and makes the most sense.  Maybe a sign is warranted on the mainline where the exit used to be indicating "Former Exit 88 - Pay Attention Next Time - Next Exit 7 Miles".


In theory, the argument about missing the 88 exit holds water, but in reality it doesn't assuming the new Advance guide signs will have the NJ 70 route marker on them.

Many people call into one of two categories: those that use exit numbers, and those that use route numbers.

Those that use route numbers should be fine.

Those that use exit numbers will wonder what happened to exit 88, no matter how many advanced warning signs are out there.

Roadrunner75

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 05, 2014, 10:26:31 PM
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 08:49:09 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:14:39 AM
I noticed last night that a new exit sign for "89C" has gone up beyond the SB tolls at 89, for the current ramp to Airport Road which will eventually be just the first exit ramp off the C/D lanes also incorporating exit 88.  I had thought they might cosign 89 and 88 for the current 89 exit, and one of the BGSs up now seemed to reinforce that with a second new covered exit number tab next to the current 89.  With 89C it sounds like 88 is going to disappear in favor of 89A/B/C. 
How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)
It's not really the 'Former' exit, since it has always been just 89.  The ramp location from the mainline for 88 is going to disappear completely in favor of it being within the C/D lanes after the toll barrier for 89.  In the short term, there's going to be a lot of angry people who 'missed' their exit when they zip past 89, expecting 88 a short distance beyond (not to mention businesses that need to reprint their marketing materials with directions on them).  But it is what it is, and I suppose 89 C/B/A is fine and makes the most sense.  Maybe a sign is warranted on the mainline where the exit used to be indicating "Former Exit 88 - Pay Attention Next Time - Next Exit 7 Miles".


In theory, the argument about missing the 88 exit holds water, but in reality it doesn't assuming the new Advance guide signs will have the NJ 70 route marker on them.

Many people call into one of two categories: those that use exit numbers, and those that use route numbers.

Those that use route numbers should be fine.

Those that use exit numbers will wonder what happened to exit 88, no matter how many advanced warning signs are out there.
Category #3:  Those that just do whatever the GPS tells them to do.  I fully expect to see some idiot 'exit' where 88 used to be, barreling through the grass / barrier / construction debris.

For the record, I use route numbers.  I suspect most people here do as well.

bzakharin

Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 05, 2014, 10:40:36 PM
Category #3:  Those that just do whatever the GPS tells them to do.  I fully expect to see some idiot 'exit' where 88 used to be, barreling through the grass / barrier / construction debris.

For the record, I use route numbers.  I suspect most people here do as well.


If the GPS has an exit number, yes this might be a problem, but there are mitigating factors in play:
1. The GPS warns the user in advance that their exit is coming up.
2. The GPS is often slightly off on the distances
The combination of the above will put the user on the alert at the first advanced warning. If the GPS mentions the exit number, or better yet, the text on the exit, then with adequate signing, the exit will not be missed.

I use a combination of exit numbers and route numbers (and occasionally GPS) because the same route can interchange with your freeway many times in different places (sometimes close together), for example many "companion" US routes to interstates.

Sometimes a destination can also help when you remember the route number, but not the exit number, or if there are no exit numbers. For example, there are 2 US-30 exits on NJ-73. The southern one lists Berlin, Camden, Atco, and Hammonton as destinations. The northern one is signed "TO US-30, CR-561" with just road names as destinations (Walker Ave, Berlin-Cross Keys Rd). Oddly enough, NJ-73 itself passes through Berlin and Atco, while Camden is closer to the northern interchange

vdeane

#114
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on November 05, 2014, 03:09:22 PM
How in hell would the E1-5 header panel be designed:  [EXITS 89-88 A-B]?  A C-D road is likely via one departure point.  Hence, one exit number (integer) with as many suffixes as practical.  89 C-B-A would be correct.  This means it should be conveyed to the road user that it is FORMER EXIT 88 (FORMER instead of OLD per NJDOT Standard)
That's how NY has done it in the past.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0669345,-76.1649978,3a,75y,292.72h,80.6t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sD8RuguXK1YscBjeoC-X6SQ!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0825607,-76.1726334,3a,75y,202.73h,78.35t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sf9rGtmUp9SaaCm0_r9hytQ!2e0

We even have c/d roads with NO suffixes.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1132149,-76.142596,3a,75y,68.27h,78.37t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sNQGme6Fs2hWQeE9iGce4kg!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1194642,-76.1292882,3a,75y,246.79h,80.5t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJcZja4iMko8oR9CezvQVpQ!2e0

There's also this thing on I-690.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0552494,-76.1627489,3a,75y,100.81h,85.39t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1srSKU7snOOxkdpLv_oVKkdQ!2e0

And I just realized all these examples are from Region 3.  That might mean something.

Quote from: bzakharin on November 06, 2014, 11:16:51 AM
If the GPS has an exit number, yes this might be a problem, but there are mitigating factors in play:
1. The GPS warns the user in advance that their exit is coming up.
2. The GPS is often slightly off on the distances
The combination of the above will put the user on the alert at the first advanced warning. If the GPS mentions the exit number, or better yet, the text on the exit, then with adequate signing, the exit will not be missed.
You're assuming that people with GPS even notice that road signs still exist.

For what it's worth, the exit number setup as noted above solves the problem with people who navigate by exit number because then 88 would still exist... you'd just need to get on a c/d road first.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

bzakharin

Quote from: vdeane on November 06, 2014, 01:11:35 PM
You're assuming that people with GPS even notice that road signs still exist.
My GPS routinely says things like "In one mile, take exit 4 toward NJ 73 Mount Laurel". It clearly assumes people with GPS will be looking for that information

vdeane

Quote from: bzakharin on November 06, 2014, 01:44:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 06, 2014, 01:11:35 PM
You're assuming that people with GPS even notice that road signs still exist.
My GPS routinely says things like "In one mile, take exit 4 toward NJ 73 Mount Laurel". It clearly assumes people with GPS will be looking for that information
Except the turn won't be in one mile, it will be right there.  And even something as simple as changing a left exit to a right exit causes GPS confusion these days.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

jeffandnicole

In my limited experiences with GPS, verbal highway instructions aren't an issue.  If the GPS is stating "in a mile", chances are it's about a mile.  A few feet here or there isn't an issue. 

The problems come up in a more localized area, where you have to figure out if it's this intersection or the next intersection, and the intersections are closely spaced together.

How many people use GPSs anyway?  The overall feeling on these forums make it out to be that nearly everyone has a GPS.  I think actual usage is way below that.

bzakharin

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 06, 2014, 02:04:22 PM
In my limited experiences with GPS, verbal highway instructions aren't an issue.  If the GPS is stating "in a mile", chances are it's about a mile.  A few feet here or there isn't an issue. 

I think @vdeane was specifically talking about GSP's exit 88 moving by a mile, which would render the "1 mile" warning on the outdated GPS data too late

Quote
How many people use GPSs anyway?  The overall feeling on these forums make it out to be that nearly everyone has a GPS.  I think actual usage is way below that.
According to http://www.ceoutlook.com/2013/04/25/%C2%BE-of-smartphone-owners-often-use-phone-to-navigate/ 76% of all smartphone owners use them to navigate. Given smart phone penetration in the US is 56.4% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_smartphone_penetration), at least 42.3% of the public use GPS navigation.

Alps

You can't fix stupid. Any time you change a roadway configuration, people who are driving until their GPS tells them to stop will get lost.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: Alps on November 06, 2014, 04:44:46 PM
You can't fix stupid. Any time you change a roadway configuration, people who are driving until their GPS tells them to stop will get lost.

+ about 1 billion.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: Alps on November 06, 2014, 04:44:46 PM
You can't fix stupid. Any time you change a roadway configuration, people who are driving until their GPS tells them to stop will get lost.

But as GPS has proven, you can indeed make stupid worse.

storm2k

Interesting thing I noted today. The new signage for 129 going southbound gives New York and Camden as the control cities. The signage for 129 going northbound shows New York and Trenton as control cities. I would have figured that they would have the same control cities going both directions.

roadman65

Quote from: storm2k on November 08, 2014, 11:18:12 PM
Interesting thing I noted today. The new signage for 129 going southbound gives New York and Camden as the control cities. The signage for 129 going northbound shows New York and Trenton as control cities. I would have figured that they would have the same control cities going both directions.
Interesting!  That sounds more than strange that two signs going up at the same time are different.

Then again, its about time control cities are used.  I wonder if the NJT will install control cities for the GSP post Exit 11 toll plaza?  Better yet on the NB guide for Exit 11 which only uses Woodbridge.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Don'tKnowYet

Quote from: storm2k on November 08, 2014, 11:18:12 PM
Interesting thing I noted today. The new signage for 129 going southbound gives New York and Camden as the control cities. The signage for 129 going northbound shows New York and Trenton as control cities. I would have figured that they would have the same control cities going both directions.

Isn't it because a southbound truss or two outside Metropark also says Trenton for Exit 130? If there is an Advance guide sign for both Exits 130 and 129 on the same truss, you can't have the same exact destination for two different exits.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.