Garden State Parkway

[ixnay]

Chevalier Ave.... is it named for Maurice or Jack?

ixnay

[ekt8750]

How big of an interchange is the Chevalier Ave. exit? According to the MUTCD Sec. 2E.20, arrow-per-lane signs are only for use at major and heavier use/intermediate interchanges. Minor and lighter use/intermediate interchanges are to be signed using conventional lane-drop signing combined with lane-use signs and pavement markings.

Not that I necessarily agree, but that's what the Manual specifies. Also see fig. 2E-11 on page 204.   

While the Turnpike Authority has followed the MUTCD rules for the most part, they don't necessarily follow them to the letter. There's this abomination of a sign that I think provides more confusion than guidance that could have been done better.

That sign is a hot mess. I'm pretty sure this violates everything an APL is meant for starting with applying it to a multiple movement exit. Secondly I can't tell if that option arrow is trying to say you can get to 78 from that lane or not. Finally the two exit tabs just look stupid and would better be served with one tab reading "EXIT 142 C-D".

[Alps]

How big of an interchange is the Chevalier Ave. exit? According to the MUTCD Sec. 2E.20, arrow-per-lane signs are only for use at major and heavier use/intermediate interchanges. Minor and lighter use/intermediate interchanges are to be signed using conventional lane-drop signing combined with lane-use signs and pavement markings.

Not that I necessarily agree, but that's what the Manual specifies. Also see fig. 2E-11 on page 204.   

While the Turnpike Authority has followed the MUTCD rules for the most part, they don't necessarily follow them to the letter. There's this abomination of a sign that I think provides more confusion than guidance that could have been done better.

That sign is a hot mess. I'm pretty sure this violates everything an APL is meant for starting with applying it to a multiple movement exit. Secondly I can't tell if that option arrow is trying to say you can get to 78 from that lane or not. Finally the two exit tabs just look stupid and would better be served with one tab reading "EXIT 142 C-D".

You can indeed get to 78 from that lane. The sign actually doesn't look that bad. 142C is a separate exit that leaves after 78.

[storm2k]

The new Exit 125 ramp opens Sunday morning, 7/9 at 6am. The Turnpike Authority put up what looks like a rendering of one of the exit signs on their Facebook page:



They sort of mashed the standard for ETC roadway exit signs in with an APL. I'll be interested to see how this looks in person. Might have to take a drive down there early next week.

Drove past the new exit this morning. The sign at the exit looks just like the rendering above. Terrible sign. Looks confusing and hard to see what you're exiting for. Would have been better off doing a standard exit sign design with two arrows and the purple banner for EZ-Pass only above. Due to the design of the APL, that purple banner is too big and doesn't make it all that clear what you're exiting for. Also, with the stupid "can't have the street name and a destination on the same sign" thing, it looks dumb just being for Chevallier Ave instead of Sayreville waterfront or something like that.

[ekt8750]

Also, with the stupid "can't have the street name and a destination on the same sign" thing, it looks dumb just being for Chevallier Ave instead of Sayreville waterfront or something like that.

So you're saying a sign like this is a no-no now?

[SignBridge]

Not exactly. The MUTCD has always stated (Sec. 2E-10) that "a city name and street name on the same sign should be avoided". However that is only a recommendation, not a mandatory standard. Some agencies like NJ DOT do follow that theory. Others like New York State DOT's Region-10 on Long Island have (wisely) never followed it.

[Alps]

Not exactly. The MUTCD has always stated (Sec. 2E-10) that "a city name and street name on the same sign should be avoided". However that is only a recommendation, not a mandatory standard. Some agencies like NJ DOT do follow that theory. Others like New York State DOT's Region-10 on Long Island have (wisely) never followed it.

NJDOT doesn't always follow it - because it's "should", engineering judgment can always prevail if needed.

[Don'tKnowYet]

Also, with the stupid "can't have the street name and a destination on the same sign" thing, it looks dumb just being for Chevallier Ave instead of Sayreville waterfront or something like that.

You can't put "Sayreville" on all the Sayreville exits or or any town on all of that town's exits or the motorist will become quite confused.  This is why Exit 124 has always been just "Main Street".  See Section 2E.42 in the MUTCD.  Maybe the NEXT 3 EXITS sign (125, 124 and 123) is forthcoming in that contract if they went "Chevalier Ave".

As a comparative example, one can tell the Parkway applied this methodology in both directions of the Toms River section.  In fact, "Toms River" only makes it to the Exit 81 signs because that's where the downtown section is.  Think about if "Toms River" ended up on all the exits in Toms River.

Assuming a Sayreville NEXT 3 EXITS sign is applied or will be applied, i like "Chevalier Ave".

[bzakharin]

That trapezoid has helped me not have to count lights when I first started using this interchange. The shape was visible from a lot further away than the text (and shield) on it. It hasn't been necessary for over 3 years, but it's still too bad that it's gone.

I hope heaven's highways are signed with squiggly arrows and trapezoidal signs and button copy text.  And populated with free flowing, non polluting traffic...

ixnay

I'm not sure what you mean here. Is that some sort of veiled threat on my life?

[roadman65]

The downtown area of Sayreville is via Main Street.  The same for South Amboy.  Chevalier Avenue is the best way to sign it IMO, as its not the main part of town.

[storm2k]

Here is the sign at the new exit 125:



Something I didn't think of, I wonder if they're going to put a barrier up ahead of the exit itself with an option lane back on to the Parkway to basically make a C/D lane, they way they do going NB headed to 127. If that's the case, the APL layout makes more sense. The Parkway has done this in a lot of places over the years (89, 91, 98, 165 to name a few), they may end up doing it here as part of the overall work at this exit.

[jeffandnicole]

Here is the sign at the new exit 125:



Something I didn't think of, I wonder if they're going to put a barrier up ahead of the exit itself with an option lane back on to the Parkway to basically make a C/D lane, they way they do going NB headed to 127. If that's the case, the APL layout makes more sense. The Parkway has done this in a lot of places over the years (89, 91, 98, 165 to name a few), they may end up doing it here as part of the overall work at this exit.

Here are the plans: http://www.state.nj.us/turnpike/documents/Int_125_Public_Hearing_Flyer.pdf . There's no c/d barrier for this exit.

Nice picture though!

[02 Park Ave]

There is a toll involved with using the C/D lane at 165.

[SignBridge]

That sign is confusing. It's hard to tell whether the E-Z Pass Only applies to the Parkway South or to the exit. Maybe Chevalier Ave. should be on the top-line with the E-Z Pass message under it?

[NJRoadfan]

The words "NO CASH" should be on there somewhere.

[plain]

Maybe if it had the words "EXIT" or "RAMP" either after or below "ONLY", it would look a lot better to the general public. Though we get what the sign is saying I can definitely see the confusion it might cause to non highway warriors.

[Alps]

Maybe if it had the words "EXIT" or "RAMP" either after or below "ONLY", it would look a lot better to the general public. Though we get what the sign is saying I can definitely see the confusion it might cause to non highway warriors.

The problem is that the logo is entirely too large, so by the time you get to the bottom of the purple space there's almost no divider left to see that it belongs to the street name. A smaller logo would also let you get ONLY (which should really be yellow, mind you) up next to the logo instead of under it, further cutting down on the height and giving plenty of room to that divider.

[seicer]

Even having the street name with "EZ-PASS" Only under it would be far better.

It reminds me of this: https://goo.gl/maps/55gcrVtuRRQ2

The signs make it not clear that the tolls apply only to trucks, buses and cars with trailers. The left sign should read "Cars, Trucks, Buses, Cars with Trailers with EZ-PASS" with a minimum toll amount listed. The right sign should be amended to read the same with CASH ONLY (or a symbol as is used elsewhere) instead of "WITHOUT EZ-PASS."

Wasn't the FHWA studying (and soliciting opinions) on these type of topics?

[plain]

Even having the street name with "EZ-PASS" Only under it would be far better.

It reminds me of this: https://goo.gl/maps/55gcrVtuRRQ2

The signs make it not clear that the tolls apply only to trucks, buses and cars with trailers. The left sign should read "Cars, Trucks, Buses, Cars with Trailers with EZ-PASS" with a minimum toll amount listed. The right sign should be amended to read the same with CASH ONLY (or a symbol as is used elsewhere) instead of "WITHOUT EZ-PASS."

Wasn't the FHWA studying (and soliciting opinions) on these type of topics?

Agreed about having the street name over the EZ-PASS, along with a smaller logo like Alps said.

Those signs at that toll plaza in your example are all sorts of fucked up... it looks like the cars in that Street View are braking because they realize they are in trouble.. it would've been a lot better if the NYSTA would've done something similar to how ISTHA does its signage at its toll plazas

[storm2k]

Maybe if it had the words "EXIT" or "RAMP" either after or below "ONLY", it would look a lot better to the general public. Though we get what the sign is saying I can definitely see the confusion it might cause to non highway warriors.

The problem is that the logo is entirely too large, so by the time you get to the bottom of the purple space there's almost no divider left to see that it belongs to the street name. A smaller logo would also let you get ONLY (which should really be yellow, mind you) up next to the logo instead of under it, further cutting down on the height and giving plenty of room to that divider.

I agree that the proportions aren't right which really makes things look weird. The white ONLY keeps with MUTCD practice. I think they would have been better off just doing a standard two arrow sign without the APL. Would have looked a lot cleaner.

[jeffandnicole]

Even having the street name with "EZ-PASS" Only under it would be far better.

It reminds me of this: https://goo.gl/maps/55gcrVtuRRQ2

The signs make it not clear that the tolls apply only to trucks, buses and cars with trailers. The left sign should read "Cars, Trucks, Buses, Cars with Trailers with EZ-PASS" with a minimum toll amount listed. The right sign should be amended to read the same with CASH ONLY (or a symbol as is used elsewhere) instead of "WITHOUT EZ-PASS."

Wasn't the FHWA studying (and soliciting opinions) on these type of topics?

Agreed about having the street name over the EZ-PASS, along with a smaller logo like Alps said.

Those signs at that toll plaza in your example are all sorts of fucked up... it looks like the cars in that Street View are braking because they realize they are in trouble.. it would've been a lot better if the NYSTA would've done something similar to how ISTHA does its signage at its toll plazas

The cars are braking because the car in front is slowing down.  A fairly common practice (unfortunately) at open road tolling.  In the Northeast where it's not uncommon for 90% of toll road usage is paid via EZ Pass, I wouldn't say they are in trouble - they're probably daily commuters and go thru these toll plazas daily.  But when the car in front slows down, you can't just continue at the same speed and ram into them.

[bzakharin]

They finally opened the acceleration lane (actually more of an extra thru lane, since it doesn't end) onto Tilton Road coming from Parkway South (Exit 36). I don't know if it's the final design (it's not striped and seems unprofessionally paved), but it sure is welcome. No backup whatsoever at that exit this morning.

[jeffandnicole]

They finally opened the acceleration lane (actually more of an extra thru lane, since it doesn't end) onto Tilton Road coming from Parkway South (Exit 36). I don't know if it's the final design (it's not striped and seems unprofessionally paved), but it sure is welcome. No backup whatsoever at that exit this morning.

The project still has a year to go, so probably in 'good enough' condition.  Final paving generally will occur near the end of the project.

[vdeane]

Those signs at that toll plaza in your example are all sorts of fucked up... it looks like the cars in that Street View are braking because they realize they are in trouble.. it would've been a lot better if the NYSTA would've done something similar to how ISTHA does its signage at its toll plazas

People tend to slow down when they get to open road tolling gantries because the transponder readers can see how fast they're going, and NYSTA HAS been known to issue fines or even revoke the E-ZPass of people who go too fast.  It's a wide threshold, but people are cautious, which is why many people go through the 20 mph E-ZPass lanes at 5 mph (which is the standard speed limit for them; 20 mph is a rarity for some lanes that are wider and do not have toll collectors crossing across the lane).  They do the same thing when they see a cop; even traffic going close to the speed limit (or even under it!) will brake when they see one.

[ixnay]

That trapezoid has helped me not have to count lights when I first started using this interchange. The shape was visible from a lot further away than the text (and shield) on it. It hasn't been necessary for over 3 years, but it's still too bad that it's gone.

I hope heaven's highways are signed with squiggly arrows and trapezoidal signs and button copy text.  And populated with free flowing, non polluting traffic...

ixnay

I'm not sure what you mean here. Is that some sort of veiled threat on my life?

No.  Why would you believe that?  I miss those kind of GSP entrance signs (not to mention button copy) too.   I believe in an afterlife.

ixnay