New Jersey Turnpike

[roadman65]

Shore Points might make sense as a destination but isn't a valid destination as per the MUTCD. Needs to be a place name like Cape May or Atlantic City.

And NY does follow the MUTCD.  Hence the Mario Cuomo Bridge on the Thruway.  Or Eastern LI on the LIE in Queens still.  Or New Jersey on some signs on Staten Island for the Goethals Bridge.

[Rothman]

Shore Points might make sense as a destination but isn't a valid destination as per the MUTCD. Needs to be a place name like Cape May or Atlantic City.

And NY does follow the MUTCD.  Hence the Mario Cuomo Bridge on the Thruway.  Or Eastern LI on the LIE in Queens still.  Or New Jersey on some signs on Staten Island for the Goethals Bridge.

NY also has its own supplement to the MUTCD.

[SignBridge]

Shore Points might make sense as a destination but isn't a valid destination as per the MUTCD. Needs to be a place name like Cape May or Atlantic City.

And NY does follow the MUTCD.  Hence the Mario Cuomo Bridge on the Thruway.  Or Eastern LI on the LIE in Queens still.  Or New Jersey on some signs on Staten Island for the Goethals Bridge.

You make a valid point roadman65. NYSDOT has been just as non-compliant as New Jersey in past years. But they are slowly coming into compliance. In the NYC area, we're seeing Borough names replacing or supplementing bridge and tunnel names as destinations. And some approaches to the Geo. Washington Br. now read Newark, NJ instead of GWB.

Also I don't personally oppose using traditional destinations on the signs. I just point out as a factual matter that some types of destinations are non-compliant. I actually think some loosening and flexibility should be written into the MUTCD standards on this subject.

[PHLBOS]

Oddly enough, the old sign in NY had the same error, even though the reassurance shields are correct (although the Thruway reassurance shield isn't usually posted for some reason).

I wouldn't necessarily call that one erroneous due to the SOUTH legend being centered between the I-87 & Thruway shields while there's a blank space above the I-287 shield.  Such IMHO was done intentionally/by design.

Similar was done along the northbound throughway; the SOUTH legend placed directly above the NJ 17 shield.

Only along the southbound Thruway does one see I-287 South & I-287 East legends on adjacent panels.

Aug. 2018 GSV

Sept. 2019 GSV showing newer pull-through BGS using the same signing convention for I-287

[bluecountry]

I've often thought Albany might be signed too soon on I-87, wouldn't Newburgh be better?

[shadyjay]

I've often thought Albany might be signed too soon on I-87, wouldn't Newburgh be better?

I'm not sure why Newburgh would need to be signed at all.  Those coming from NJ on I-287 get auxillary signs that say "To New England, Use I-87 North to I-84 East".  Outside of that, I can't imagine too many people who would need a sign to get them to Newburgh.  Most know that Albany is to the north.  But Newburgh? 

[lstone19]

I'm not sure why Newburgh would need to be signed at all.  Those coming from NJ on I-287 get auxillary signs that say "To New England, Use I-87 North to I-84 East".  Outside of that, I can't imagine too many people who would need a sign to get them to Newburgh.  Most know that Albany is to the north.  But Newburgh?

Newburgh is not, IMHO, well enough known. Thruway control cities should be the major ones along the road: NYC, Albany, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo. From what I can see, the Thruway uses Erie west of Buffalo, passing on using Dunkirk, which along with adjacent Fredonia, is of comparable size to Newburgh.

EDIT: Maybe this needs to move to the Thruway topic, not here under NJ Turnpike

[famartin]

I'm not sure why Newburgh would need to be signed at all.  Those coming from NJ on I-287 get auxillary signs that say "To New England, Use I-87 North to I-84 East".  Outside of that, I can't imagine too many people who would need a sign to get them to Newburgh.  Most know that Albany is to the north.  But Newburgh?

Newburgh is not, IMHO, well enough known. Thruway control cities should be the major ones along the road: NYC, Albany, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo. From what I can see, the Thruway uses Erie west of Buffalo, passing on using Dunkirk, which along with adjacent Fredonia, is of comparable size to Newburgh.

EDIT: Maybe this needs to move to the Thruway topic, not here under NJ Turnpike

This probably should move to the Thruway topic, but I looked at the populations of these areas:
Albany - 1.1 million metro
Utica - 297 thousand metro
Syracuse - 662 thousand metro
Rochester - 1.1 million metro
Buffalo - 1.2 million metro

Newburgh/Poughkeepsie combined had 670 thousand, but most was Poughkeepsie from what I can tell, so it probably would make more sense to use Poughkeepsie.

Anyway, the point of all that was that Poughkeepsie probably makes more sense to use than Utica (I'm kinda surprised they even use Utica, its been quite a while since I was on the thruway west of Albany)

[lstone19]

Newburgh is not, IMHO, well enough known. Thruway control cities should be the major ones along the road: NYC, Albany, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo. From what I can see, the Thruway uses Erie west of Buffalo, passing on using Dunkirk, which along with adjacent Fredonia, is of comparable size to Newburgh.

EDIT: Maybe this needs to move to the Thruway topic, not here under NJ Turnpike

This probably should move to the Thruway topic, but I looked at the populations of these areas:
Albany - 1.1 million metro
Utica - 297 thousand metro
Syracuse - 662 thousand metro
Rochester - 1.1 million metro
Buffalo - 1.2 million metro

Newburgh/Poughkeepsie combined had 670 thousand, but most was Poughkeepsie from what I can tell, so it probably would make more sense to use Poughkeepsie.

Anyway, the point of all that was that Poughkeepsie probably makes more sense to use than Utica (I'm kinda surprised they even use Utica, its been quite a while since I was on the thruway west of Albany)

I don't know whether the Thruway uses Utica or not and when I made that post, was debating with myself whether to say Utica or just skip to Syracuse. It definitely was marginal in my mind.

[SignBridge]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

[vdeane]

I'm not sure why Newburgh would need to be signed at all.  Those coming from NJ on I-287 get auxillary signs that say "To New England, Use I-87 North to I-84 East".  Outside of that, I can't imagine too many people who would need a sign to get them to Newburgh.  Most know that Albany is to the north.  But Newburgh?

Newburgh is not, IMHO, well enough known. Thruway control cities should be the major ones along the road: NYC, Albany, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo. From what I can see, the Thruway uses Erie west of Buffalo, passing on using Dunkirk, which along with adjacent Fredonia, is of comparable size to Newburgh.

EDIT: Maybe this needs to move to the Thruway topic, not here under NJ Turnpike

Newburgh does have one thing going for it that Dunkirk doesn't, at least as far as potential control city status goes - I-84 (and I-84 uses it as a control city).

[Alps]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

[famartin]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

[roadman65]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Florida on I-75 is the same.  It uses Tampa Southbound from the GA State Line, but then has Ocala, Lake City, and Valdosta all going NB the entire time Tampa is used the other way.

Anyway, as far as Newburgh goes, it is a control city on I-84 from west and east.  In fact on that route it would be better used than "Milford" which PennDOT chose to use for I-84 East out of Scranton.  To me Milford really has no use as no major roads intersect there and its a small PA borough.  Plus the route west of Milford was built after the route east of it, so it never was a freeway terminus either.  Even Port Jervis would serve better as its at the state line of NY, or Middletown due to NY 17 (Future I-86).

[Alps]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

[PHLBOS]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

[famartin]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

It's as much part of the NJ Turnpike now as I-84 used to be part of the Thruway...

[SignBridge]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

It's as much part of the NJ Turnpike now as I-84 used to be part of the Thruway...

PHLBOS, you are correct and you can see the NJTA signing all the way to the GW Bridge.

[Alps]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

[Rothman]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Why would the Turnpike Authority maintain a road that is not theirs?

[jeffandnicole]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Why would the Turnpike Authority maintain a road that is not theirs?

Because one of NJ's Governor in the 90's needed revenue,  so instead of raising taxes (or in addition to), he forced the Turnpike to "buy" the portion of I-95 between the NJ Tpk/I-80 and the PANYNJ maintained portion near the GWB for $400 million.

While a maintenance agreement between departments,  authorities or agencies isn't terribly unusual, this deal was quite a bit unusual for its scope and cost.

[Rothman]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Why would the Turnpike Authority maintain a road that is not theirs?

Because one of NJ's Governor in the 90's needed revenue,  so instead of raising taxes (or in addition to), he forced the Turnpike to "buy" the portion of I-95 between the NJ Tpk/I-80 and the PANYNJ maintained portion near the GWB for $400 million.

While a maintenance agreement between departments,  authorities or agencies isn't terribly unusual, this deal was quite a bit unusual for its scope and cost.

Right, but that is similar to when the Thruway added I-84 -- even to their logo.

If the Turnpike bought it, then it is theirs and it is the Turnpike.

[PHLBOS]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Fair enough.

However, it is worth noting that Newark was used (along with New York) on older northbound NJTP ramp signage.  Such existed until roughly a decade ago.

[Alps]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Why would the Turnpike Authority maintain a road that is not theirs?

Because one of NJ's Governor in the 90's needed revenue,  so instead of raising taxes (or in addition to), he forced the Turnpike to "buy" the portion of I-95 between the NJ Tpk/I-80 and the PANYNJ maintained portion near the GWB for $400 million.

While a maintenance agreement between departments,  authorities or agencies isn't terribly unusual, this deal was quite a bit unusual for its scope and cost.

Right, but that is similar to when the Thruway added I-84 -- even to their logo.

If the Turnpike bought it, then it is theirs and it is the Turnpike.

I-84 was not the Thruway. It was I-84 and maintained by the Thruway Authority. Otherwise every single state highway is the Transportation.

[Rothman]

States like to use their capitals as control cities. NJ Turnpike always used Trenton. Out in California, on I405 in the middle of Los Angeles the northbound pull-through signs originally said Bakersfield but were later changed to Sacramento, further north and 400 miles from L.A. vs. 110 miles for Bakersfield.

NJ Turnpike has a lot of control cities that aren't quite on the route. Trenton, Camden, Wilmington spring to mind.

Though those are only used in one direction (southbound). Only one control city is used northbound of course...

Not quite

... which also isn't on the Turnpike

Even though it's not part of the toll-ticketed system & wasn't originally(?); isn't the stretch of I-95 between I-80 and the G.W. Bridge presently part of the NJ Turnpike?  If so, such indeed does go through Fort Lee.

Well you're referring to a one-off use case that I wasn't thinking of, so I disclaim any connection. But no, it's not part of the NJ Turnpike. It's maintained by the Turnpike Authority but I would say the Turnpike ends at 46 or no later than 80.

Why would the Turnpike Authority maintain a road that is not theirs?

Because one of NJ's Governor in the 90's needed revenue,  so instead of raising taxes (or in addition to), he forced the Turnpike to "buy" the portion of I-95 between the NJ Tpk/I-80 and the PANYNJ maintained portion near the GWB for $400 million.

While a maintenance agreement between departments,  authorities or agencies isn't terribly unusual, this deal was quite a bit unusual for its scope and cost.

Right, but that is similar to when the Thruway added I-84 -- even to their logo.

If the Turnpike bought it, then it is theirs and it is the Turnpike.

I-84 was not the Thruway. It was I-84 and maintained by the Thruway Authority. Otherwise every single state highway is the Transportation.

Thruway added it to their logo.

Depends on how you define state highway when it comes to NYSDOT.  Sections are certainly owned and maintained by other authorities (NYSBA comes to mind...).