New Jersey

[famartin]

There was a discussion on here a while back, but this sign came about as part of the signage modifications due to 95 becoming 295.

I assumed as much. Its interesting though that on the actual sign for 95/NJTP on I-195, it says "New York/Camden" instead of the "New York/Philadelphia" used here. It would be nice... (I know I'm asking a lot for the NJTA to change cities)

Remember, this is a sign to help guide people from Great Adventure. You're thinking of it in terms of a NJ Turnpike destination sign. The 95/NJ Tpk shields and the destination cities shown aren't exactly mean to be fully related here. One can easily take 295 or 29 to get to Philly also.

They *can* but 95 is the most direct route (and as I've mentioned a zillion times, the control cities SHOULD be Philly/NYC)

[jeffandnicole]

There was a discussion on here a while back, but this sign came about as part of the signage modifications due to 95 becoming 295.

I assumed as much. Its interesting though that on the actual sign for 95/NJTP on I-195, it says "New York/Camden" instead of the "New York/Philadelphia" used here. It would be nice... (I know I'm asking a lot for the NJTA to change cities)

Remember, this is a sign to help guide people from Great Adventure. You're thinking of it in terms of a NJ Turnpike destination sign. The 95/NJ Tpk shields and the destination cities shown aren't exactly mean to be fully related here. One can easily take 295 or 29 to get to Philly also.

They *can* but 95 is the most direct route (and as I've mentioned a zillion times, the control cities SHOULD be Philly/NYC)

Control cities need not be limited to the most direct route.

The control city opinion you present for the NJ Turnpike isn't relevant to this particular sign. This sign is simply guiding motorists towards areas, assisting them where they need to go.  If the control cities were true to the actual route you're using here, it would be "Trenton", not NY/Philly, as you are getting on 195 West.

[famartin]

There was a discussion on here a while back, but this sign came about as part of the signage modifications due to 95 becoming 295.

I assumed as much. Its interesting though that on the actual sign for 95/NJTP on I-195, it says "New York/Camden" instead of the "New York/Philadelphia" used here. It would be nice... (I know I'm asking a lot for the NJTA to change cities)

Remember, this is a sign to help guide people from Great Adventure. You're thinking of it in terms of a NJ Turnpike destination sign. The 95/NJ Tpk shields and the destination cities shown aren't exactly mean to be fully related here. One can easily take 295 or 29 to get to Philly also.

They *can* but 95 is the most direct route (and as I've mentioned a zillion times, the control cities SHOULD be Philly/NYC)

Control cities need not be limited to the most direct route.

The control city opinion you present for the NJ Turnpike isn't relevant to this particular sign. This sign is simply guiding motorists towards areas, assisting them where they need to go.  If the control cities were true to the actual route you're using here, it would be "Trenton", not NY/Philly, as you are getting on 195 West.

Its somewhat relevant when the sign on I-195 heading in that direction then says this... (also, there are other ways to reach NYC, like staying straight on 537 to US 9, which is shorter, but not quite the fastest way (I-95 is only a little faster)).

A bit disconnected in messaging there...

[Alps]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

[roadman65]

It's funny how they actually sign the Turnpike with its proper (IMHO) control cities near a popular attraction for out-of-staters (Six Flags)...

That is a welcome change to update these signs including adding I-95 as well.  Older signs (from the 80's) had only the NJ Turnpike.   Though I would still use Shore Points for east as many visitors to Six Flags are heading to many resorts along the coast, in this case the rule can be ignored, or do what NYSDOT does on the LIE and use Eastern LI with Riverhead to satisfy both the Feds and locals.

"Shore Points" hasn't been the official control city used for about 10-15 years now.

Whether its 15 years or 20 years. for the perspective of the motorist visiting Six Flags, they can bring it back just for them here anyway.

[storm2k]

https://goo.gl/maps/dU4qG2sCMUXgdMJcA

What kind of stunt is this?  The guide sign is not only awful, but not MUTCD compliant as well.

What happened to the original guides that were large and normal freeway style that once stood here for decades?

At least they have a sign there, unlike at 5B further on up the road.

[famartin]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

[Alps]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

No. You're thinking wrong. NJDOT isn't trying to lead NJTA anywhere. And the NJTA isn't going to hold them to the fire for signing Philadelphia on this sign. For travelers exiting Great Adventure, this sign makes perfect sense, and that's as far as that goes.

[jeffandnicole]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities.  It is simply a sign to help guide motorists towards various locations where they may have come from.  You are reading into the meaning of this sign way too much. 

It should really be signed "Trenton" as that's the proper control city for 195 West, but it was decided to go a different route as Trenton probably wouldn't be as helpful. If you think they are somehow trying to encourage the NJTA towards what you believe should be control cities, you are sadly mistaken.  NJDOT could've listed GSP Control cities as well, but went with Belmar for 195 East.

[famartin]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities. 

You believe what you want. I'll believe what I want.

[famartin]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities.  It is simply a sign to help guide motorists towards various locations where they may have come from.  You are reading into the meaning of this sign way too much. 

It should really be signed "Trenton" as that's the proper control city for 195 West, but it was decided to go a different route as Trenton probably wouldn't be as helpful. If you think they are somehow trying to encourage the NJTA towards what you believe should be control cities, you are sadly mistaken.  NJDOT could've listed GSP Control cities as well, but went with Belmar for 195 East.

BTW Jeff, you seemed so much nicer 20 years ago on MTR than you are now. These days you seem like an old grumpy curmudgeon much of the time. Out of curiosity, do you even remember our interactions back then?  They seemed decidedly more pleasant than now.

[jeffandnicole]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities.  It is simply a sign to help guide motorists towards various locations where they may have come from.  You are reading into the meaning of this sign way too much. 

It should really be signed "Trenton" as that's the proper control city for 195 West, but it was decided to go a different route as Trenton probably wouldn't be as helpful. If you think they are somehow trying to encourage the NJTA towards what you believe should be control cities, you are sadly mistaken.  NJDOT could've listed GSP Control cities as well, but went with Belmar for 195 East.

BTW Jeff, you seemed so much nicer 20 years ago on MTR than you are now. These days you seem like an old grumpy curmudgeon much of the time. Out of curiosity, do you even remember our interactions back then?  They seemed decidedly more pleasant than now.

I'm just an old fuddy-duddy now.  I blame it on being around too many other grumpy people.

And my memory has sucked since about the 3rd grade.  I'm amazed at what people remember from MTR.  I don't remember anything from those days.  Heck - I don't remember what I post here half the time.  If there's something I want to mention that I think I may have posted, I'll often look back to see if I discussed it already.

[famartin]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities.  It is simply a sign to help guide motorists towards various locations where they may have come from.  You are reading into the meaning of this sign way too much. 

It should really be signed "Trenton" as that's the proper control city for 195 West, but it was decided to go a different route as Trenton probably wouldn't be as helpful. If you think they are somehow trying to encourage the NJTA towards what you believe should be control cities, you are sadly mistaken.  NJDOT could've listed GSP Control cities as well, but went with Belmar for 195 East.

BTW Jeff, you seemed so much nicer 20 years ago on MTR than you are now. These days you seem like an old grumpy curmudgeon much of the time. Out of curiosity, do you even remember our interactions back then?  They seemed decidedly more pleasant than now.

I'm just an old fuddy-duddy now.  I blame it on being around too many other grumpy people.

And my memory has sucked since about the 3rd grade.  I'm amazed at what people remember from MTR.  I don't remember anything from those days.  Heck - I don't remember what I post here half the time.  If there's something I want to mention that I think I may have posted, I'll often look back to see if I discussed it already.

Wow, really. Sorry to hear that. I remember we even e-mailed back and forth sometimes, when you had the I-295 guide and I was setting up my own NJFreeways site. I still have a ghost of it and I just checked - It still credits you with helping on the exit guide graphics! http://www.raymondcmartinjr.com/njfreeways/NJI-295SouthJerseyExits.html  (also, please no laughing at the quality, this has probably gone unchanged for about 20 years  )

[jeffandnicole]

I agree there needs to be better guidance to Philadelphia. In general, this was not addressed with the Turnpike connection, since the signs in question are not on NJTA roads. NJDOT needs to think about this as they re-sign, and it looks like they might be, but over the period of sign replacement, instead of putting out patches sooner.

I think NJDOT got away with this sign because its far enough away from the turnpike so that they could ignore what the turnpike considers its official controls to be. At actual entrances, I don't think NJDOT has contradicted NJTA's official cities in any way, and I'm sure that's deliberate. That said, I think with this sign, NJDOT is kinda trying to lead NJTA in the right direction with a hint-hint/nudge-nudge.

Again, and you're not accepting this reasoning for whatever reason, but this sign has nothing to do with the NJ Turnpike or NJ Turnpike control cities.  It is simply a sign to help guide motorists towards various locations where they may have come from.  You are reading into the meaning of this sign way too much. 

It should really be signed "Trenton" as that's the proper control city for 195 West, but it was decided to go a different route as Trenton probably wouldn't be as helpful. If you think they are somehow trying to encourage the NJTA towards what you believe should be control cities, you are sadly mistaken.  NJDOT could've listed GSP Control cities as well, but went with Belmar for 195 East.

BTW Jeff, you seemed so much nicer 20 years ago on MTR than you are now. These days you seem like an old grumpy curmudgeon much of the time. Out of curiosity, do you even remember our interactions back then?  They seemed decidedly more pleasant than now.

I'm just an old fuddy-duddy now.  I blame it on being around too many other grumpy people.

And my memory has sucked since about the 3rd grade.  I'm amazed at what people remember from MTR.  I don't remember anything from those days.  Heck - I don't remember what I post here half the time.  If there's something I want to mention that I think I may have posted, I'll often look back to see if I discussed it already.

Wow, really. Sorry to hear that. I remember we even e-mailed back and forth sometimes, when you had the I-295 guide and I was setting up my own NJFreeways site. I still have a ghost of it and I just checked - It still credits you with helping on the exit guide graphics! http://www.raymondcmartinjr.com/njfreeways/NJI-295SouthJerseyExits.html  (also, please no laughing at the quality, this has probably gone unchanged for about 20 years  )

Nah, I actually do remember that, and in some varying internet searches, I still come across some of the old pages.  Even though there's been vast improvements over the years, what worked back then still works now!

[jeffandnicole]

NJDOT finally updated their 6 month forecast: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/ (they're usually very good doing it every month; it hadn't been updated since August though).  Of interest to me at least - there are a few overpasses on I-76 right between the Walt Whitman Bridge and 295 that need replacement: Definitely this one:
https://goo.gl/maps/wVhks8Jvktnrh59w6 , and possibly this one: https://goo.gl/maps/KBiz16eDyn5HyLiP8 (I can't remember what this specific project entails; there may be two similar projects in the area with different timelines).

I went to a public meeting about this project a few years ago; I believe they are going to try to replace enter sections in a single weekend sections - 1 or 2 lanes at a time - to minimize traffic disruptions. There's also the matter of the 295/76/42 Interchange project going on too in the same vicinity that they'll have to work around.

[J Route Z]

NJDOT finally updated their 6 month forecast: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/ (they're usually very good doing it every month; it hadn't been updated since August though).  Of interest to me at least - there are a few overpasses on I-76 right between the Walt Whitman Bridge and 295 that need replacement: Definitely this one:
https://goo.gl/maps/wVhks8Jvktnrh59w6 , and possibly this one: https://goo.gl/maps/KBiz16eDyn5HyLiP8 (I can't remember what this specific project entails; there may be two similar projects in the area with different timelines).

I went to a public meeting about this project a few years ago; I believe they are going to try to replace enter sections in a single weekend sections - 1 or 2 lanes at a time - to minimize traffic disruptions. There's also the matter of the 295/76/42 Interchange project going on too in the same vicinity that they'll have to work around.

For me it still says updated February 3, 2020 at the very bottom.

[jeffandnicole]

NJDOT finally updated their 6 month forecast: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/ (they're usually very good doing it every month; it hadn't been updated since August though).  Of interest to me at least - there are a few overpasses on I-76 right between the Walt Whitman Bridge and 295 that need replacement: Definitely this one:
https://goo.gl/maps/wVhks8Jvktnrh59w6 , and possibly this one: https://goo.gl/maps/KBiz16eDyn5HyLiP8 (I can't remember what this specific project entails; there may be two similar projects in the area with different timelines).

I went to a public meeting about this project a few years ago; I believe they are going to try to replace enter sections in a single weekend sections - 1 or 2 lanes at a time - to minimize traffic disruptions. There's also the matter of the 295/76/42 Interchange project going on too in the same vicinity that they'll have to work around.

For me it still says updated February 3, 2020 at the very bottom.

If the list of projects you see starts with November, then it's updated. That date may be manually entered, so they may not update *that*! Lol

[J Route Z]

NJDOT finally updated their 6 month forecast: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/ (they're usually very good doing it every month; it hadn't been updated since August though).  Of interest to me at least - there are a few overpasses on I-76 right between the Walt Whitman Bridge and 295 that need replacement: Definitely this one:
https://goo.gl/maps/wVhks8Jvktnrh59w6 , and possibly this one: https://goo.gl/maps/KBiz16eDyn5HyLiP8 (I can't remember what this specific project entails; there may be two similar projects in the area with different timelines).

I went to a public meeting about this project a few years ago; I believe they are going to try to replace enter sections in a single weekend sections - 1 or 2 lanes at a time - to minimize traffic disruptions. There's also the matter of the 295/76/42 Interchange project going on too in the same vicinity that they'll have to work around.

For me it still says updated February 3, 2020 at the very bottom.

If the list of projects you see starts with November, then it's updated. That date may be manually entered, so they may not update *that*! Lol

I see it now. Talk about ironic 

Something else I noticed which made me happy was that they updated the pothole reporting page. https://www.njdotproblemreporting.com/ They now include a map where you can pinpoint the location of any type of road issue. Unlike the older format, this one has a drop down menu with various, rather specific road hazards to report, such as flooding, fires, different types of tree hazards, problems with maintenance vehicles, etc.  The real test is how quickly they respond to whatever is reported.

[storm2k]

Not sure the best place to talk about this, but did note that with the ongoing construction of the new Terminal One at Newark Airport (and it will continue to annoy me that they don't just keep the Terminal A name since the plan is to demolish the existing Terminal A once the new building opens) but it looks like the PA is going to use the same gantry style for overhead signage as used on the NJ Turnpike and also by the PA on the new Goethals Bridge. I'm curious if they'll be doing some sort of hybrid signage that includes VMS elements to make it easier to route traffic on the roadways to the new terminal building. I will try to grab a picture the next time I'm at the airport and it's not 6am and dark out. It's not on GSV yet.

[J Route Z]

It seems as if the DOT made a mistake with a milepost on US 22 in Newark, where it says mile 59.5 eastbound, while westbound says mile 60.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7078499,-74.1962901,3a,75y,320.09h,93.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSwjEQwAGZqdI-3UE7-Gczw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I also noticed this same issue on Route 18 northbound in East Brunswick at milepost 35.5 while southbound is posted mile 35.

[NJRoadfan]

The westbound marker is wrong. The original correct MP 60 is still posted: https://goo.gl/maps/SJtV43zJcESGGXTs6

[Alps]

It seems as if the DOT made a mistake with a milepost on US 22 in Newark, where it says mile 59.5 eastbound, while westbound says mile 60.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7078499,-74.1962901,3a,75y,320.09h,93.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSwjEQwAGZqdI-3UE7-Gczw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I also noticed this same issue on Route 18 northbound in East Brunswick at milepost 35.5 while southbound is posted mile 35.

I have noticed the Route 18 problem myself and put in a notification to NJDOT to fix it. You can do the same: https://www.njdotproblemreporting.com/

[MaddogMicharski]

Is anybody aware of any major highways infrastructure plans or new highways being built in NJ other than the I-295, I-76, and NJ-42 interchange?

[Alps]

Is anybody aware of any major highways infrastructure plans or new highways being built in NJ other than the I-295, I-76, and NJ-42 interchange?

https://www.nj.gov/transportation/business/procurement/ProfServ/AnticipatedSolic.shtm
Unfortunately, the projects I know of aren't listed there yet, so I can't divulge (competitive interest). But there are some interchange reconstructions coming up.

[jeffandnicole]

Is anybody aware of any major highways infrastructure plans or new highways being built in NJ other than the I-295, I-76, and NJ-42 interchange?

In addition to Alps' link above, here are the links for the major road entities in NJ with possible upcoming projects.  Note that many are in development of some sort, most projects won't actually be constructed for several years:

NJDOT List of Construction projects most likely going out to bid in the next 6 months: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/procurement/ConstrServ/PlannedAdv/

NJDOT FY 2021 Project list, searchable by county and route: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp21/sec5.shtm

NJDOT 5 Year Project list: https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp21/sec7/njdot5year.pdf

NJ Turnpike & Parkway Proposed Capital Improvement Program: https://www.njta.com/media/5179/proposed-2020-capital-improvement-program.pdf

AC Expressway Proposed Capital Improvement Program: https://www.sjta.com/sjta/pdfs/2020/2020%20Capital%20Plan.pdf

Based on the above, in terms of the interchange and new highways you asked about, you're not really going to see new highways in NJ, simply because there's really no room to build, and they are extremely controversial in this state.  The Route 206 Hillsborough Bypass is about as close as you're going to come to a roadway on a new alignment.

Some interchange projects also bring some new roadways on unique alignments as well:  The 295/42 Missing Moves project, separate from the 295/76/42 project, is about a 1 mile entirely elevated roadway.  The ACX Exit 9 interchange project will be essentially a new roadway on a different alignment, and the proposed Interchange 7 Flyover from the GSP to the ACX will also be a significant improvement.