New Jersey

[odditude]

the county name isn't really important for 500-series routes, since they're part of a statewide system - they add no useful information to a BGS while potentially impeding legibility, similar to the state name on an Interstate shield in the same circumstances.

i personally think the yellow backplate improves the recognizability of the pentagon shape, making it more useful as opposed to the more purely-cosmetic use of the black backplate for state and US routes. i wish that change hadn't been mandated by MUTCD.

[artmalk]

I think the county shield looks better with no backplate.   The replacement of US and state signs with "no backplate" signs is going very slowly.  It's hard to believe NJ was using the backplate incorrectly for decades until AASHTO apparently noticed!

[Alps]

the county name isn't really important for 500-series routes, since they're part of a statewide system - they add no useful information to a BGS while potentially impeding legibility, similar to the state name on an Interstate shield in the same circumstances.

i personally think the yellow backplate improves the recognizability of the pentagon shape, making it more useful as opposed to the more purely-cosmetic use of the black backplate for state and US routes. i wish that change hadn't been mandated by MUTCD.

The pentagon is supposed to have a doubly thick border when on a green background to maintain target value.

[famartin]

the county name isn't really important for 500-series routes, since they're part of a statewide system - they add no useful information to a BGS while potentially impeding legibility, similar to the state name on an Interstate shield in the same circumstances.

You are definitely correct, and the simpler version with no words and largest possible numbers makes them easiest to read.

i personally think the yellow backplate improves the recognizability of the pentagon shape, making it more useful as opposed to the more purely-cosmetic use of the black backplate for state and US routes. i wish that change hadn't been mandated by MUTCD.

Agree, given that NJDOT doesn't post the non-backplated CR shields correctly (see below).

I think the county shield look better with no backplate.   The replacement of US and state signs with "no backplate" signs is going very slowly.  It's hard to believe NJ was using the backplate incorrectly for decades until AASHTO apparently noticed!

I think the backplate adds to legibility, but probably not enough to justify the extra cost, especially given the way they are now making signs.  I'm honestly not sure if this was AASHTO backlash... their sign production process seems to be different for the signs they've posted in the last few years, so it may just be cheaper not to include backplates.  As far as replacement... I don't think they are in a rush. NJDOT seems to replace signs once they decide they are no longer useful, which can be 30+ years sometimes.  I know there are still signs out there that are about that old.

The pentagon is supposed to have a doubly thick border when on a green background to maintain target value.

Bingo.

[NJRoadfan]

NJDOT tends to replace signs with reflective sheeting every 20 years or so. The last round that eliminated most button copy went up in the late 90s and many of those signs are getting replaced now. Older mid-90s "transition" signs with reflective sheeting and button copy are still up (a lot on I-287 still) so reflective sheeting can make it at least 25 years.

[jeffandnicole]

NJDOT tends to replace signs with reflective sheeting every 20 years or so. The last round that eliminated most button copy went up in the late 90s and many of those signs are getting replaced now. Older mid-90s "transition" signs with reflective sheeting and button copy are still up (a lot on I-287 still) so reflective sheeting can make it at least 25 years.

Most Route 55 button-copy signage between Exit 53 and Rt. 42 went up prior to 1985, and still stands.

When they replaced the 295 signage, they used older As-Built plans, which didn't account for newer replacements. One very vivid example is at Exit 13 SB: 295 was 3 lanes wide, and the center lane split to 295 or 130. The highway was widened in the 1990s to 4 lanes wide at the split, and new signage was installed to show the revised split. When the signs were replaced, the new signage only showed a 3 lane setup again. It has never been corrected.

[Mr. Matté]

I agree that the version with no text in it other than the number works best for non-reassurance shields. I wish they would be consistent about it though. Either no text, or the correct text with county names.

I prefer the incorrect text on county names:

[ixnay]

I agree that the version with no text in it other than the number works best for non-reassurance shields. I wish they would be consistent about it though. Either no text, or the correct text with county names.

I prefer the incorrect text on county names:

Taken in Atlantic County, I presume. Where in Atlantic County?

ixnay

[famartin]

I agree that the version with no text in it other than the number works best for non-reassurance shields. I wish they would be consistent about it though. Either no text, or the correct text with county names.

I prefer the incorrect text on county names:

Taken in Atlantic County, I presume. Where in Atlantic County?

ixnay

Looks like 52 NB entering Somers Point from the bridge to Ocean City

[Mr. Matté]

I agree that the version with no text in it other than the number works best for non-reassurance shields. I wish they would be consistent about it though. Either no text, or the correct text with county names.

I prefer the incorrect text on county names:

Taken in Atlantic County, I presume. Where in Atlantic County?

Westbound (on a bike with a strong headwind) on the Route 52 bridge from Ocean City into Somers Point. Pretty much the only sign error I spotted on my biking/roadgeeking tour of the Little- and regular Egg Harbor areas yesterday (excluding the private homeowner who had a portable VMS at his driveway advertising a losing presidential candidate for a year since passed).

The south segment of NJ 167 is flooded with utility company laydown boards for over-wetland work, the northern segment of former NJ 167 much overgrown with some kind of plant.

[TheGrassGuy]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

[artmalk]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

I believe that at some point it was.  I think it used to be two lanes from Morristown south to Harding.  Also, I recall 287 being 2 lanes from Parsippany to the previous end of the road in Montville, and that it was widened to 3 lanes in anticipation of the completion of 287.

[TheGrassGuy]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

I believe that at some point it was.  I think it used to be two lanes from Morristown south to Harding.  Also, I recall 287 being 2 lanes from Parsippany to the previous end of the road in Montville, and that it was widened to 3 lanes in anticipation of the completion of 287.

Were any of the bridges replaced? Or were they all wider than the road at the time to anticipate the widening?

[famartin]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

I think that was the HOV-lane project in the 90s. Those lanes were converted to general-purpose after less than 10 years.

[storm2k]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

I think that was the HOV-lane project in the 90s. Those lanes were converted to general-purpose after less than 10 years.

The 287 lanes didn't even last a year. They opened in sections, but the lanes were complete in 1998 and killed the same year. I do believe the overpasses in the Morristown area were widened the accommodate the extra lanes in that area, since it's 8 lanes between 35 and 39 there and then 10 between 39 and 41.

[TheGrassGuy]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

I think that was the HOV-lane project in the 90s. Those lanes were converted to general-purpose after less than 10 years.

The 287 lanes didn't even last a year. They opened in sections, but the lanes were complete in 1998 and killed the same year. I do believe the overpasses in the Morristown area were widened the accommodate the extra lanes in that area, since it's 8 lanes between 35 and 39 there and then 10 between 39 and 41.

I wonder if there are any photographs of 1) the HOV lanes while they existed or 2) the old overpasses in Morristown.

[Alps]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

[Mr. Matté]

Was I-287 ever widened in Morristown? The Morris Ave and Lafayette Ave underpasses look unusually new.

Lafayette I can't tell because some douchebag nearby wanted their house blurred on GSV but Morris Ave.'s overpass, if the state-required bridge plate is anything to go by, was built in 1973. The Franklin St., 124, and South St. bridges to the south are all 1968. The Hanover Ave. overpass to the north was also 1973.

[famartin]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

[Alps]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

That was my thinking, but I was working and didn't have time to check myself. I recall everything being built to 3 lanes originally, at least Morristown north.

[TheGrassGuy]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

IIRC the HOV lanes weren't added separately, just cut out from the existing lanes, but removed after a short time because they did nothing to alleviate traffic.

[famartin]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

IIRC the HOV lanes weren't added separately, just cut out from the existing lanes, but removed after a short time because they did nothing to alleviate traffic.

That's something you can check on https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer and it clearly shows that while in 1979 there were 3 lanes each way at CR 510, in 2002 there were 4 each way.

[NJRoadfan]

The HOV lanes on I-287 were added, not taken from existing lanes. The state had to show proof that the HOV lanes were not working as intended in order to keep the federal funding used to widen the highway. After the restrictions were lifted, all NJDOT did was remove the signs listing the restrictions. The diamonds remained on the roadway until they either wore off or the roadway was repaved.

[TheGrassGuy]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

IIRC the HOV lanes weren't added separately, just cut out from the existing lanes, but removed after a short time because they did nothing to alleviate traffic.

That's something you can check on https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer and it clearly shows that while in 1979 there were 3 lanes each way at CR 510, in 2002 there were 4 each way.

Any more long-time NJ residents here who can remember what the old bridges in Morristown looked like?

[roadman65]

To confirm or deny anything you're saying, go to Historic Aerials and check back through the years. 1979 is particularly good quality and color.

Yeah, after I suggested the HOV widening, I looked there and realized they kinda look the same. It seems they just eliminated the shoulders to fit in the lanes.

IIRC the HOV lanes weren't added separately, just cut out from the existing lanes, but removed after a short time because they did nothing to alleviate traffic.

That's something you can check on https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer and it clearly shows that while in 1979 there were 3 lanes each way at CR 510, in 2002 there were 4 each way.

Any more long-time NJ residents here who can remember what the old bridges in Morristown looked like?

No but can remember in 1970 when I-287 was dirt and the bridges carrying NJ 24 (now 124) and South Street spanned that dirt and the Green was heavily congested as 287 traffic used US 202 at that time due to the fact that the freeway ended at North Maple Avenue.


Also remember the 8-8-12-12-12 signal head on SB US 202 at Washington Street? That had three green arrows for the three turns as each turn was independent of each other.