News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

Started by Zeffy, February 25, 2014, 11:08:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

roadman65

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 16, 2017, 10:37:19 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2017, 10:32:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:14:49 PM
Does not the GPS, tell people where to go anyway?  I would assume that it would keep sending folks down the Turnpike to I-295, across the Delaware Memorial Bridge, and then back on I-95 once this is completed?

I think if the GPS were to send people from NYC to DC via I-78 West and then I-81 South to I-83 South and then I-695 around the long loop of Baltimore and then finally down I-95 just for an experiment, many of course would not only follow that route, but never realize they went miles out of their way.   That is how clueless the world is now thanks to that form of technology.
If GPS said to drive off a cliff...

Are we really that bad, that we have become Lemmings? Don't answer that, I already know the answer...  :banghead: :ded:
How dumb would someone have to be to drive of a cliff because of gps?
When you turn 18, get a job here in FL on the toll roads and see the dummies we get.  Folks who come onto the toll road completely ignoring the toll warnings and then claim that they "Did not know they were on a toll road."

People are stupid and blame the fact that they are out of state is their reason for not paying attention to road signs.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe


jeffandnicole

QuoteThat was less mileage out of the way than I-195 to I-295 here, and ended up built. But there was local outcry for it. If there isn't any in Southern NJ, then I don't really see an issue, other than it just being odd, having I-95 and I-295 cross but not connect

The only place I've seen it mentioned is on these boards. Every movement is easily served by other options, and this location is in a fairly rural area, far enough from those commuting to either Philly or NYC.

Quote
The signs approaching Exit 6 southbound will tell drivers headed south to follow I-95 across the Delaware River and through Center City Philadelphia on the Delaware Expressway.

It's easy enough to see the likely effects by using 95 North. Nearly every single weekend, hoards of motorists jam the right two lanes on 95 in Delaware to make their way to the NJ Turnpike/I-295.  Then, those hoards of people will stay in the left 2 lanes of the Del Mem Bridge to take the NJ Turnpike.

If they're ignoring the routing of 95 going North, and the reinforcement of a x95 going North, they'll ignore the routing of 95 going South.


Roadgeekteen

Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:42:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 16, 2017, 10:37:19 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2017, 10:32:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:14:49 PM
Does not the GPS, tell people where to go anyway?  I would assume that it would keep sending folks down the Turnpike to I-295, across the Delaware Memorial Bridge, and then back on I-95 once this is completed?

I think if the GPS were to send people from NYC to DC via I-78 West and then I-81 South to I-83 South and then I-695 around the long loop of Baltimore and then finally down I-95 just for an experiment, many of course would not only follow that route, but never realize they went miles out of their way.   That is how clueless the world is now thanks to that form of technology.
If GPS said to drive off a cliff...

Are we really that bad, that we have become Lemmings? Don't answer that, I already know the answer...  :banghead: :ded:
How dumb would someone have to be to drive of a cliff because of gps?
When you turn 18, get a job here in FL on the toll roads and see the dummies we get.  Folks who come onto the toll road completely ignoring the toll warnings and then claim that they "Did not know they were on a toll road."

People are stupid and blame the fact that they are out of state is their reason for not paying attention to road signs.
But driving off a cliff is another level of stupid.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

bzakharin

Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:32:33 PM
I don't think that even the NJ Turnpike is yet signed south of Exit 9 (from photos I have seen) either.
I believe you are right about thru traffic, but here is the entrance at Exit 8 signing I-95:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2633221,-74.5068069,3a,75y,230.3h,82.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKfWqxxQAnSLb18PIL3vkpg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
This is the southernmost NJTA reference to I-95. NJDOT signs it from I-195 as well.

PHLBOS

Quote from: bzakharin on October 17, 2017, 01:48:33 PMThis is the southernmost NJTA reference to I-95. NJDOT signs it from I-195 as well.
Actually, the southernmost NJTP/I-95 reference sign to date is this one at the Woodrow Wilson Service Plaza located between Exits 7 & 7A.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

theroadwayone

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 17, 2017, 08:49:21 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:42:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 16, 2017, 10:37:19 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2017, 10:32:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2017, 10:14:49 PM
Does not the GPS, tell people where to go anyway?  I would assume that it would keep sending folks down the Turnpike to I-295, across the Delaware Memorial Bridge, and then back on I-95 once this is completed?

I think if the GPS were to send people from NYC to DC via I-78 West and then I-81 South to I-83 South and then I-695 around the long loop of Baltimore and then finally down I-95 just for an experiment, many of course would not only follow that route, but never realize they went miles out of their way.   That is how clueless the world is now thanks to that form of technology.
If GPS said to drive off a cliff...

Are we really that bad, that we have become Lemmings? Don't answer that, I already know the answer...  :banghead: :ded:
How dumb would someone have to be to drive of a cliff because of gps?
When you turn 18, get a job here in FL on the toll roads and see the dummies we get.  Folks who come onto the toll road completely ignoring the toll warnings and then claim that they "Did not know they were on a toll road."

People are stupid and blame the fact that they are out of state is their reason for not paying attention to road signs.
But driving off a cliff is another level of stupid.
May I drink to that?

bzakharin

Quote from: PHLBOS on October 17, 2017, 02:30:41 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on October 17, 2017, 01:48:33 PMThis is the southernmost NJTA reference to I-95. NJDOT signs it from I-195 as well.
Actually, the southernmost NJTP/I-95 reference sign to date is this one at the Woodrow Wilson Service Plaza located between Exits 7 & 7A.
Haven't been on any service area in awhile, so missed that one. Kind of pointless on a service area that only connects to one direction of travel. Not sure what was there before. "Exit"?

briantroutman

I generally support the idea that all relevant links in the nation's freeway grid should be Interstates (a view that is somewhat unpopular here), and I also think that signing the southern NJ Turnpike as an x95 makes sense. But that said, I don't think that doing so would have any meaningful impact on motorists' decision to stay on the NJ Turnpike vs. using I-95 in Pennsylvania.

My impression is that the vast majority of drivers fall into one of two camps.

One group (I'd guess the larger of the two) just follows directions, whether they be live on a GPS device or from an online mapping service before they leave. Considering that the NJ Turnpike route is about five miles shorter and avoids Philadelphia traffic, mapping services would usually favor the NJ route–numbered or not–except perhaps when traffic tie ups at the I-295 interchange or an accident along the NJ Turnpike temporarily make the PA route faster.

The other group consists of people who just use the routes they've known and driven for years. Those people will continue to call it "the turnpike"  and drive it regardless of it being numbered or not.

I think it's a very small minority that navigate via the numbers, and of those who know only that "...95 will take me to Florida" , I have to think that the pull of a genuine I-95 shield will be much greater than whatever little reassurance that an even-numbered x95 would provide.

bzakharin

Quote from: briantroutman on October 17, 2017, 03:55:59 PM
I generally support the idea that all relevant links in the nation's freeway grid should be Interstates (a view that is somewhat unpopular here), and I also think that signing the southern NJ Turnpike as an x95 makes sense. But that said, I don't think that doing so would have any meaningful impact on motorists' decision to stay on the NJ Turnpike vs. using I-95 in Pennsylvania.

My impression is that the vast majority of drivers fall into one of two camps.

One group (I'd guess the larger of the two) just follows directions, whether they be live on a GPS device or from an online mapping service before they leave. Considering that the NJ Turnpike route is about five miles shorter and avoids Philadelphia traffic, mapping services would usually favor the NJ route–numbered or not–except perhaps when traffic tie ups at the I-295 interchange or an accident along the NJ Turnpike temporarily make the PA route faster.

The other group consists of people who just use the routes they've known and driven for years. Those people will continue to call it "the turnpike"  and drive it regardless of it being numbered or not.

I think it's a very small minority that navigate via the numbers, and of those who know only that "...95 will take me to Florida" , I have to think that the pull of a genuine I-95 shield will be much greater than whatever little reassurance that an even-numbered x95 would provide.
And yet people get confused when new signage is introduced. See http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/07/what_happened_to_the_parkway_sign_for_the_turnpike_ask_commutinglarry.html
And that was where no new route numbers were introduced.

mrsman

Quote from: bzakharin on October 17, 2017, 04:03:10 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on October 17, 2017, 03:55:59 PM
I generally support the idea that all relevant links in the nation's freeway grid should be Interstates (a view that is somewhat unpopular here), and I also think that signing the southern NJ Turnpike as an x95 makes sense. But that said, I don't think that doing so would have any meaningful impact on motorists' decision to stay on the NJ Turnpike vs. using I-95 in Pennsylvania.

My impression is that the vast majority of drivers fall into one of two camps.

One group (I'd guess the larger of the two) just follows directions, whether they be live on a GPS device or from an online mapping service before they leave. Considering that the NJ Turnpike route is about five miles shorter and avoids Philadelphia traffic, mapping services would usually favor the NJ route–numbered or not–except perhaps when traffic tie ups at the I-295 interchange or an accident along the NJ Turnpike temporarily make the PA route faster.

The other group consists of people who just use the routes they've known and driven for years. Those people will continue to call it "the turnpike"  and drive it regardless of it being numbered or not.

I think it's a very small minority that navigate via the numbers, and of those who know only that "...95 will take me to Florida" , I have to think that the pull of a genuine I-95 shield will be much greater than whatever little reassurance that an even-numbered x95 would provide.
And yet people get confused when new signage is introduced. See http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/07/what_happened_to_the_parkway_sign_for_the_turnpike_ask_commutinglarry.html
And that was where no new route numbers were introduced.

I think a great solution to this problem (if it is a problem) would be to re-allow the use of suffixes on interstate highways, but only in limited circumstances.  Suffixed routes, like the existing examples in Dallas-Fort Worth and Twin Cities, must start and end at a common point.  If one is traveling northbound along I-35 from the southern side of Texas (or Minnesota), taking either I-35E or I-35 W would get you through metro-Dallas (or metro-Minneapolis) and lead back to I-35 well north of town.

In much the same way, a new I-95 E signed along I-295 in DE, the DE Memorial Bridge, and the southern section of the NJTP until exit 6 would reinforce the notion that both I-95 through Philly and I-95E via the turnpike are both valid routes for through traffic between the NYC area and Delaware.  I-95 of course goes right through Philadelphia, but any long distance driver can rest assured that I-95E would also get them back to the mainline of I-95 once you are south of metro-Philadelphia.  (Simply signing it as I-895 may not have the same connotation as an even 3di just means that it connects two or more interstates together.  Some even 3 dis are bypasses that head back to the parent 2di (like I-495 around Wilmington), some are beltways [which also act in some way as a bypass] (like I-495 in the DC area), and some are connectors to other interstates and only meet their parent once (I-276 in Philly area connects I-76 to I-95, it does not lead you back to I-76.))

Beltway

Quote from: mrsman on November 19, 2017, 08:07:32 PM
I think a great solution to this problem (if it is a problem) would be to re-allow the use of suffixes on interstate highways, but only in limited circumstances.  Suffixed routes, like the existing examples in Dallas-Fort Worth and Twin Cities, must start and end at a common point.  If one is traveling northbound along I-35 from the southern side of Texas (or Minnesota), taking either I-35E or I-35 W would get you through metro-Dallas (or metro-Minneapolis) and lead back to I-35 well north of town.
In much the same way, a new I-95 E signed along I-295 in DE, the DE Memorial Bridge, and the southern section of the NJTP until exit 6 would reinforce the notion that both I-95 through Philly and I-95E via the turnpike are both valid routes for through traffic between the NYC area and Delaware.  I-95 of course goes right through Philadelphia, but any long distance driver can rest assured that I-95E would also get them back to the mainline of I-95 once you are south of metro-Philadelphia.  (Simply signing it as I-895 may not have the same connotation as an even 3di just means that it connects two or more interstates together.  Some even 3 dis are bypasses that head back to the parent 2di (like I-495 around Wilmington), some are beltways [which also act in some way as a bypass] (like I-495 in the DC area), and some are connectors to other interstates and only meet their parent once (I-276 in Philly area connects I-76 to I-95, it does not lead you back to I-76.))

But then how many of the motoring public would know about this rule that suffixed Interstate routes would have to begin and end at the same mainline Interstate route?

Those that were driving when there were the original suffixed routes might figure that it is the same, that there are at least 4 different types.  Many operated like a 3-digit route, and a few operated like long distance mainline routes.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

SignBridge

Sometimes I think it would be simpler to use the German Autobahn sign system. Just list the major cities for each route, with the route numbers on the bottom line of the sign. For instance northbound at the I-95/295 split in Delaware you could list Philadelphia for I-95 and New York and Newark for I-295/NJT. The public might actually find that system which emphasizes the city names over the numbered routes, simpler to follow. 

mrsman

Quote from: Beltway on November 19, 2017, 10:02:19 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 19, 2017, 08:07:32 PM
I think a great solution to this problem (if it is a problem) would be to re-allow the use of suffixes on interstate highways, but only in limited circumstances.  Suffixed routes, like the existing examples in Dallas-Fort Worth and Twin Cities, must start and end at a common point.  If one is traveling northbound along I-35 from the southern side of Texas (or Minnesota), taking either I-35E or I-35 W would get you through metro-Dallas (or metro-Minneapolis) and lead back to I-35 well north of town.
In much the same way, a new I-95 E signed along I-295 in DE, the DE Memorial Bridge, and the southern section of the NJTP until exit 6 would reinforce the notion that both I-95 through Philly and I-95E via the turnpike are both valid routes for through traffic between the NYC area and Delaware.  I-95 of course goes right through Philadelphia, but any long distance driver can rest assured that I-95E would also get them back to the mainline of I-95 once you are south of metro-Philadelphia.  (Simply signing it as I-895 may not have the same connotation as an even 3di just means that it connects two or more interstates together.  Some even 3 dis are bypasses that head back to the parent 2di (like I-495 around Wilmington), some are beltways [which also act in some way as a bypass] (like I-495 in the DC area), and some are connectors to other interstates and only meet their parent once (I-276 in Philly area connects I-76 to I-95, it does not lead you back to I-76.))

But then how many of the motoring public would know about this rule that suffixed Interstate routes would have to begin and end at the same mainline Interstate route?

Those that were driving when there were the original suffixed routes might figure that it is the same, that there are at least 4 different types.  Many operated like a 3-digit route, and a few operated like long distance mainline routes.

For those who do research, like roadgeeks and transport professionals (a small percentage of the population), they will simply know the rule from the AASHTO rule book, or perhaps by example.  (It seems like every suffixed group in Dallas, Minneapolis, proposed NJ start and end at the same point, that's probably the rule).

And as far as the old suffixed routes, I am not suggesting that there is any good reason to reinstate them.  I don't want to see I-80x on any road that doesn't serve in some way as a connection from San Francisco to Teaneck, NJ.  The fact that there were other spur routes that went to Denver or Portland or along hte Penn Turnpike in the past should be of no consequence as to what should be allowed for the future.

For I-95, it is very simple for people to follow the directions to go from Boston or NYC to DC, VA, or FL to simply follow I-95.  If we wanted to ensure that this through traffic does not go through Philly, then using a sign that says I-95E south to Wilmington, DE (or even better IMO Baltimore, MD) at NJTP Exit 6 would direct people to use the best bypass.  Following the city will make it clear for those who follow cities and for those who follow numbers they are still following numbers.

FWIW, nobody seems to have a problem with following I-35 between San Antonio and Oklahoma City.  It's one road.  You have a choice of going through Dallas or Fort Worth, but all in all it's still one highway.


Beltway

#763
Quote from: mrsman on November 24, 2017, 03:19:17 PM
Quote from: Beltway on November 19, 2017, 10:02:19 PM
But then how many of the motoring public would know about this rule that suffixed Interstate routes would have to begin and end at the same mainline Interstate route?
Those that were driving when there were the original suffixed routes might figure that it is the same, that there are at least 4 different types.  Many operated like a 3-digit route, and a few operated like long distance mainline routes.
For those who do research, like roadgeeks and transport professionals (a small percentage of the population), they will simply know the rule from the AASHTO rule book, or perhaps by example.  (It seems like every suffixed group in Dallas, Minneapolis, proposed NJ start and end at the same point, that's probably the rule).
And as far as the old suffixed routes, I am not suggesting that there is any good reason to reinstate them.  I don't want to see I-80x on any road that doesn't serve in some way as a connection from San Francisco to Teaneck, NJ.  The fact that there were other spur routes that went to Denver or Portland or along hte Penn Turnpike in the past should be of no consequence as to what should be allowed for the future.
For I-95, it is very simple for people to follow the directions to go from Boston or NYC to DC, VA, or FL to simply follow I-95.  If we wanted to ensure that this through traffic does not go through Philly, then using a sign that says I-95E south to Wilmington, DE (or even better IMO Baltimore, MD) at NJTP Exit 6 would direct people to use the best bypass.  Following the city will make it clear for those who follow cities and for those who follow numbers they are still following numbers.
FWIW, nobody seems to have a problem with following I-35 between San Antonio and Oklahoma City.  It's one road.  You have a choice of going through Dallas or Fort Worth, but all in all it's still one highway.

I just looked at the signage in Texas for those routes on Google Maps Roadway View, and at the northern and southern splits, the I-35 highway signage simply branches into I-35W Fort Worth and I-35E Dallas.  I went back 2 1/2 miles and that is what all the overhead signs said, there was nothing said about what happens after those two cities, about whether the highways rejoin or not, or about how to get to San Antonio or Oklahoma City.  It doesn't explain about what happens to I-35 itself, taken on face value it seems like I-35 ends and it becomes two new separate routes.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

theroadwayone

With the discussion about suffixed interstates, I'd like to interject my two cents (particularly about I-80: )

It should have been signed as I-80N from Youngstown to Teaneck, as it normally runs. And I-76 from Youngstown to Valley Forge, the entirety of I-276, and then I-95 (or something else) connecting to Teaneck should be I-80S. That, or I-95 could run concurrent with I-80S from the Turnpike interchange, across the Delaware, and then I-80S would interchange with I-295 and run concurrent with that, and then it could meander it's way back to I-80N, and the two run as I-80 to Teaneck.

There. Problem solved.

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: theroadwayone on November 25, 2017, 09:59:42 PM
With the discussion about suffixed interstates, I'd like to interject my two cents (particularly about I-80: )

It should have been signed as I-80N from Youngstown to Teaneck, as it normally runs. And I-76 from Youngstown to Valley Forge, the entirety of I-276, and then I-95 (or something else) connecting to Teaneck should be I-80S. That, or I-95 could run concurrent with I-80S from the Turnpike interchange, across the Delaware, and then I-80S would interchange with I-295 and run concurrent with that, and then it could meander it's way back to I-80N, and the two run as I-80 to Teaneck.

There. Problem solved.
Most of your I-80S actually used to be numbered that.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

sparker

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 25, 2017, 10:22:04 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on November 25, 2017, 09:59:42 PM
With the discussion about suffixed interstates, I'd like to interject my two cents (particularly about I-80: )

It should have been signed as I-80N from Youngstown to Teaneck, as it normally runs. And I-76 from Youngstown to Valley Forge, the entirety of I-276, and then I-95 (or something else) connecting to Teaneck should be I-80S. That, or I-95 could run concurrent with I-80S from the Turnpike interchange, across the Delaware, and then I-80S would interchange with I-295 and run concurrent with that, and then it could meander it's way back to I-80N, and the two run as I-80 to Teaneck.

There. Problem solved.
Most of your I-80S actually used to be numbered that.

The original 1957 Interstate plan, which didn't include I-80 across north-central PA but did use US 6 and 6N across the PA northern tier as a I-84 western extension, routed I-80 over the PA Turnpike to I-81, where it split into 80S continuing along the Pike to Philadelphia as I-76 does today -- but there was a I-80N multiplexed with I-81 NE to current I-78; I-80N continued into NYC along the original I-78 path through Brooklyn & Queens and back up to the East Bronx.  The I-80 "straightline" across PA didn't come about until the next iteration of plans late the following year, which also deleted I-84 west of Scranton. 

jcn

To answer everyones question of if the ramps will open in 2018 or 2019, phase 1 also includes work at the Benselem Interchange, and that won't be complete until 2019.  The ramps should open in 2018.  The northbound flyover ramp is getting close to completion, even the streetlights along the northbound ramp have been installed.  They plan on opening the northbound and southbound ramps at the same time though.

ARMOURERERIC

Would be nice to see a Google satellite image update.

Mr. Matté

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 10, 2017, 09:22:55 AM
Would be nice to see a Google satellite image update.

Much to your chagrin (which thanks to last night's SNL I now know how to spell), a very recent imagery update throughout Central Jersey from October 27, 2017 has its western edge at the first stream crossing west of the US 13 interchange. The interchange's default is still May 2016.

roadman65

I heard from a reliable source, that NJDOT will soon be signing I-295 to the portion of I-95 in NJ.  If so it should be interesting to see how they match up the two N-S Segments opposing each other either at US 1 in Lawrence, NJ or at the Scudders Falls Crossing. 

I doubt PennDOT will sign present I-95 SB as I-295 NB nor I-95 NB as I-295 SB.  If it were Virginia it would have no direction like both I-64 in Chesapeake I-295 near Richmond between I-95 and I-64.  However, once in a while NJDOT does have a few surprises.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

odditude

Quote from: roadman65 on December 22, 2017, 11:31:12 AM
I heard from a reliable source, that NJDOT will soon be signing I-295 to the portion of I-95 in NJ.  If so it should be interesting to see how they match up the two N-S Segments opposing each other either at US 1 in Lawrence, NJ or at the Scudders Falls Crossing. 

I doubt PennDOT will sign present I-95 SB as I-295 NB nor I-95 NB as I-295 SB.  If it were Virginia it would have no direction like both I-64 in Chesapeake I-295 near Richmond between I-95 and I-64.  However, once in a while NJDOT does have a few surprises.

project site for the renumbering - as has been discussed many times, I-295 will be E-W in PA and N-S in NJ.

roadman65

#772
Well I do not check these out that often.  Being without internet and having to use the library or McDonalds these days I only come on here a couple of minutes a day, I will admit that I kind of knew it would be elsewhere but risked this.

Anyway, the source that gave me the info is not convinced totally that its in stone, and the two people who are my sources are well respected individuals on this forum and in the community.

Not to be sarcastic or anything, but thank your for sharing that.  It would make sense to do that by changing it to East and West as at that point the route is a beltway and like others (ie Indy's I-435) it would not be out of place.   

Edit:  This link is NJDOT which is not totally telling you everything.  That is in other matters as I have found NJDOT in the past to leave out projects or provide poor links to some projects being worked on.  However, I must confess that NJDOT is got this right.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

jp the roadgeek

Quote from: roadman65 on December 22, 2017, 11:42:32 AM
Well I do not check these out that often.  Being without internet and having to use the library or McDonalds these days I only come on here a couple of minutes a day, I will admit that I kind of knew it would be elsewhere but risked this.

Anyway, the source that gave me the info is not convinced totally that its in stone, and the two people who are my sources are well respected individuals on this forum and in the community.

Not to be sarcastic or anything, but thank your for sharing that.  It would make sense to do that by changing it to East and West as at that point the route is a beltway and like others (ie Indy's I-435 465) it would not be out of place.   

Edit:  This link is NJDOT which is not totally telling you everything.  That is in other matters as I have found NJDOT in the past to leave out projects or provide poor links to some projects being worked on.  However, I must confess that NJDOT is got this right.

FTFY.  Unless you meant Kansas City's I-435
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

Beltway

Quote from: odditude on December 22, 2017, 11:36:48 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 22, 2017, 11:31:12 AM
I heard from a reliable source, that NJDOT will soon be signing I-295 to the portion of I-95 in NJ.  If so it should be interesting to see how they match up the two N-S Segments opposing each other either at US 1 in Lawrence, NJ or at the Scudders Falls Crossing. 
I doubt PennDOT will sign present I-95 SB as I-295 NB nor I-95 NB as I-295 SB.  If it were Virginia it would have no direction like both I-64 in Chesapeake I-295 near Richmond between I-95 and I-64.  However, once in a while NJDOT does have a few surprises.
project site for the renumbering - as has been discussed many times, I-295 will be E-W in PA and N-S in NJ.

Will there be any more unusual 3 digit route, in that whereas it was a long bypass that general paralleled I-95, beginning next year it will be a long parallel route with a partial beltway loop at the northern end?

Granted that with the I-195 connection it has been and will continue to be a bypass of I-95.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)



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.