Hello all -
Last time I was on the New Jersey Turnpike (northbound), I noticed that the signage at exit 6A, which seemed fairly new, marked the Pennsylvania Turnpike connector as I-276, without a "to." (This was a couple of weeks ago and I don't remember what else was on the sign - might just be "I-276" with "Penna Tpk" as control destination.) Has the designation been officially extended into New Jersey now?
No, and it never will be.
Do the panels that you saw have the I-276 shield toward the right of the panel?
If so . . . The signs currently display West/276/Penn Turnpike. (The new southbound ones at the interchange are already up.) There are green patches on the panels where other (future) elements are covered, such as I-95 South and Philadelphia. Within that covered area is the word "to".
The I-276 designation still ends at the Pa side of the state line in the river, but this end will, in a few years, move further west when I-95 takes over the Extension and the eastern few miles of the Pa Turnpike.
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
The NJ Turnpike spur and mainline down to the spur have even been "secretly" officially designated I-95–but not signed–for some time now.
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Probably because I-195 was a political compromise that arose later on.
I think I discovered another reason for I-276 not extending into NJ. When originally signed, it was a bypass of I-80S, as I-76 was originally numbered. At this time, it was numbered as I-280. New Jersey already had its I-280 designated up in North Jersey, as far back as 1958. Seeing as it would have made no sense to change the designation of the highway at the state line (to something like I-680), that it had an already-recognizable designation separate from the interstate number (PA Turnpike) that could be easily used in signage, and that the highway was entirely funded by the Turnpike Authority, it makes sense that there would be no numbering.
Later on, numbering the highway to I-276 would have likely been seen as having little benefit to justify the cost of signage and getting AASHTO approval.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 20, 2012, 07:49:00 PM
I think I discovered another reason for I-276 not extending into NJ. When originally signed, it was a bypass of I-80S, as I-76 was originally numbered. At this time, it was numbered as I-280. New Jersey already had its I-280 designated up in North Jersey, as far back as 1958. Seeing as it would have made no sense to change the designation of the highway at the state line (to something like I-680), that it had an already-recognizable designation separate from the interstate number (PA Turnpike) that could be easily used in signage, and that the highway was entirely funded by the Turnpike Authority, it makes sense that there would be no numbering.
Later on, numbering the highway to I-276 would have likely been seen as having little benefit to justify the cost of signage and getting AASHTO approval.
If the Turnpike had been connected to I-95, it would be a moot point. I-276 could have ended at I-95 just like I-476 does.
Quote from: Beltway on June 20, 2012, 09:32:40 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 20, 2012, 07:49:00 PM
I think I discovered another reason for I-276 not extending into NJ. When originally signed, it was a bypass of I-80S, as I-76 was originally numbered. At this time, it was numbered as I-280. New Jersey already had its I-280 designated up in North Jersey, as far back as 1958. Seeing as it would have made no sense to change the designation of the highway at the state line (to something like I-680), that it had an already-recognizable designation separate from the interstate number (PA Turnpike) that could be easily used in signage, and that the highway was entirely funded by the Turnpike Authority, it makes sense that there would be no numbering.
Later on, numbering the highway to I-276 would have likely been seen as having little benefit to justify the cost of signage and getting AASHTO approval.
If the Turnpike had been connected to I-95, it would be a moot point. I-276 could have ended at I-95 just like I-476 does.
Or if New Jersey would have connected I-276 with I-295 or US 130...
Might as well extend it, cause the construction still not started yet after years of planning. I am beginning to think that I-74 in West Virginia will be built before this simple interchange gets off the ground.
Here it is, for anyone who need a pic, like me (Doug's pic):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6113%2F6333121707_8b0af91bfe_z.jpg&hash=41116892da451e3c04a5659132806ad637e74917)
Definitely will be SOUTH I-95 TO I-276.
Quote from: HighwayMaster on June 22, 2012, 08:42:49 PM
Here it is, for anyone who need a pic, like me (Doug's pic):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6113%2F6333121707_8b0af91bfe_z.jpg&hash=41116892da451e3c04a5659132806ad637e74917)
Definitely will be SOUTH I-95 TO I-276.
I have to say I like the new signage. Hope other parts of the NJ Turnpike upgrade the signage (at least the current/future I-95 section).
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
also like new signage...hope they do the rest of the I-95 part as an actual interstate and not with the ugly signs.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I did not like the sign panels that were on that gantry (they were uninformative and sooo-1950's), but I loved the gantry itself, and in a perfect world, the Turnpike Authority would have either retained that old gantry, or built a new one using the same campy style and installed new, MUTCD-compliant sign panels on it.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 23, 2012, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I did not like the sign panels that were on that gantry (they were uninformative and sooo-1950's), but I loved the gantry itself, and in a perfect world, the Turnpike Authority would have either retained that old gantry, or built a new one using the same campy style and installed new, MUTCD-compliant sign panels on it.
NJDOT did so in Jersey City on WB I-78 on the viaduct leading to the Turnpike. They copied the 1950's style gantry used at Exit 6 (and on some CA Freeways) and just erected modern sign panels.
Quote from: HighwayMaster on June 22, 2012, 08:42:49 PM
Here it is, for anyone who need a pic, like me (Doug's pic):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6113%2F6333121707_8b0af91bfe_z.jpg&hash=41116892da451e3c04a5659132806ad637e74917)
Definitely will be SOUTH I-95 TO I-276.
Hmm. I was going northbound, so it was a different sign. As I said, it was a couple of weeks ago at this point so I don't remember in detail, but I don't think there was that sort of blatant empty space for something else: just a 276 shield in a reasonable position for the only shield on a sign and (I think) "Pa Tpk" under it. Definitely no "TO," or I wouldn't have asked the question.
I know that when I went through here with a friend to Wilmington, DE (as the pull-through suggests!) on June 2nd-3rd that the newer on-ramps were being used from Turnpike Extension north to I-95/New Jersey Turnpike north.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I always liked that one as well. I just like that original Turnpike sign style that you don't get anywhere else in the country, with those funky swerve arrows on the exit gantries, etc
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=jackson+nj&hl=en&ll=40.103565,-74.723468&spn=0.00947,0.016544&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=40.052282,67.763672&t=h&hnear=Jackson,+Ocean,+New+Jersey&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.10407,-74.722962&panoid=Ms7Es29hRoC9O8SBmkNEKQ&cbp=12,229.14,,0,7.35
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 06:01:44 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 23, 2012, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I did not like the sign panels that were on that gantry (they were uninformative and sooo-1950's), but I loved the gantry itself, and in a perfect world, the Turnpike Authority would have either retained that old gantry, or built a new one using the same campy style and installed new, MUTCD-compliant sign panels on it.
NJDOT did so in Jersey City on WB I-78 on the viaduct leading to the Turnpike. They copied the 1950's style gantry used at Exit 6 (and on some CA Freeways) and just erected modern sign panels.
You're 100% wrong. The gantries on I-78 dateD to the same time as the Exit 6 ones. Only two of them are left - Exits 14A and 14B ramps. All of the mainline ones are gone, and don't even pretend to tell me that they look like the originals.
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
I still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
As stated upthread, there IS a "TO" in front of the 276 shield, it was just covered up with the 95 shield.
QuoteI still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 07:27:02 AM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
As stated upthread, there IS a "TO" in front of the 276 shield, it was just covered up with the 95 shield.
QuoteI still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Wilmington is the next major city, and the only one in Delaware big enough to be signed. The NJTA only wants to sign one city - if they did two, then you could add Baltimore. Also, THRU TRAFFIC is now dead for any new signs.
Quote from: Steve on June 26, 2012, 08:19:25 AM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 07:27:02 AM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
As stated upthread, there IS a "TO" in front of the 276 shield, it was just covered up with the 95 shield.
QuoteI still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Wilmington is the next major city, and the only one in Delaware big enough to be signed. The NJTA only wants to sign one city - if they did two, then you could add Baltimore. Also, THRU TRAFFIC is now dead for any new signs.
Are you sure? I swear I've seen THRU TRAFFIC used in conjunction with a NJTP shield on a new pull-through.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs
There is a supplemental EXIT 6 BGS for US 130 erected along southbound NJTP w/
Florence listed as a control city.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 09:19:49 AM
Quote from: Steve on June 26, 2012, 08:19:25 AMWilmington is the next major city, and the only one in Delaware big enough to be signed. The NJTA only wants to sign one city - if they did two, then you could add Baltimore. Also, THRU TRAFFIC is now dead for any new signs.
Are you sure? I swear I've seen THRU TRAFFIC used in conjunction with a NJTP shield on a new pull-through.
When I was last on the NJ Turnpike, nearly, 2 weeks ago, I did see a new gantry laying on its side (for Exit 7A off the southbound Turnpike) that clearly had "
NJTP shield SOUTH THRU TRAFFIC" on its pull-through BGS. Since I was driving, and the sign was could only be viewed if one looked sideways, I couldn't tell if there was any 'temporary' green covers (for I-95 shields) on the sign.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 09:19:49 AM
Quote from: Steve on June 26, 2012, 08:19:25 AM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 07:27:02 AM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
As stated upthread, there IS a "TO" in front of the 276 shield, it was just covered up with the 95 shield.
QuoteI still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Wilmington is the next major city, and the only one in Delaware big enough to be signed. The NJTA only wants to sign one city - if they did two, then you could add Baltimore. Also, THRU TRAFFIC is now dead for any new signs.
Are you sure? I swear I've seen THRU TRAFFIC used in conjunction with a NJTP shield on a new pull-through.
New as in, anything designed from this point forward.
Quote from: Steve on June 25, 2012, 08:49:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 06:01:44 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 23, 2012, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I did not like the sign panels that were on that gantry (they were uninformative and sooo-1950's), but I loved the gantry itself, and in a perfect world, the Turnpike Authority would have either retained that old gantry, or built a new one using the same campy style and installed new, MUTCD-compliant sign panels on it.
NJDOT did so in Jersey City on WB I-78 on the viaduct leading to the Turnpike. They copied the 1950's style gantry used at Exit 6 (and on some CA Freeways) and just erected modern sign panels.
You're 100% wrong. The gantries on I-78 dateD to the same time as the Exit 6 ones. Only two of them are left - Exits 14A and 14B ramps. All of the mainline ones are gone, and don't even pretend to tell me that they look like the originals.
Not the ones on the Hudson Bay Extension itself. The ones that NJDOT installed after the NJ 139 viaduct rehabilitation project a few years ago on the bridge leading up from Boyle Plaza up the hill. Look at street view, you will see new signs that even feature I-280 shields for lower level NJ 139 pull through signs with the new combined 1-9 shields.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 26, 2012, 09:37:42 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 25, 2012, 08:49:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 06:01:44 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 23, 2012, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 01:07:14 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 23, 2012, 12:59:01 PM
Considering that the old and ugly green gantry that was in that area previously? It was probably there since the Turnpike opened in the 1950s!
Actually I thought that gantry was classic and it is a shame that NJTA is removing it permanently just as the original slant roof toll plazas are being modernized or ramps relocated as in the case of Exit 8
I did not like the sign panels that were on that gantry (they were uninformative and sooo-1950's), but I loved the gantry itself, and in a perfect world, the Turnpike Authority would have either retained that old gantry, or built a new one using the same campy style and installed new, MUTCD-compliant sign panels on it.
NJDOT did so in Jersey City on WB I-78 on the viaduct leading to the Turnpike. They copied the 1950's style gantry used at Exit 6 (and on some CA Freeways) and just erected modern sign panels.
You're 100% wrong. The gantries on I-78 dateD to the same time as the Exit 6 ones. Only two of them are left - Exits 14A and 14B ramps. All of the mainline ones are gone, and don't even pretend to tell me that they look like the originals.
Not the ones on the Hudson Bay Extension itself. The ones that NJDOT installed after the NJ 139 viaduct rehabilitation project a few years ago on the bridge leading up from Boyle Plaza up the hill. Look at street view, you will see new signs that even feature I-280 shields for lower level NJ 139 pull through signs with the new combined 1-9 shields.
You're talking about the huge gantries westbound on 139? Pretty sure those are Port Authority.
Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 08:18:15 AM
You're talking about the huge gantries westbound on 139? Pretty sure those are Port Authority.
NJDOT maintains the roadway after the NBE split. The viaduct reconstruction was their project.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 27, 2012, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 08:18:15 AM
You're talking about the huge gantries westbound on 139? Pretty sure those are Port Authority.
NJDOT maintains the roadway after the NBE split. The viaduct reconstruction was their project.
The gantries I'm referring to are before the split.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 07:27:02 AM
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Delaware used to be used for one of the control points for the GSP exit onto the NJ Tpk southbound, though it was not replicated elsewhere on the Tpk mainline in North Jersey.
when did google maps start designating the NJTP extension and the TP north to exit 7 as I-95? i just noticed it today, i know NJDOT had it unsigned as those routes for the future interchange...surprised they labeled it this early
Quote from: Alex on June 28, 2012, 02:57:36 PMDelaware used to be used for one of the control points for the GSP exit onto the NJ Tpk southbound, though it was not replicated elsewhere on the Tpk mainline in North Jersey.
Actually, the control destination for NJTP southbound listed on the GSP southbound exit sign is
Del. Mem. BridgeA
Del. Mem. Bridge placard was posted a few months after this ramp sign was erected:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey999/gsp_sb_exit_129_02.jpg)
From the mainline GSP southbound (with the terrible I-95 & 287 shields):
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey999/gsp_sb_exit_129_01.jpg)
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 28, 2012, 05:11:56 PM
when did google maps start designating the NJTP extension and the TP north to exit 7 as I-95? i just noticed it today, i know NJDOT had it unsigned as those routes for the future interchange...surprised they labeled it this early
Both AAA and the NJDOT have shown I-95 shields along the NJTP between Exits 7A and 11 on their road maps for some time now.
i meant exit 6 to 7a including the NJTP extension into PA, i should have worded it better...
Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 11:40:27 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 27, 2012, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 08:18:15 AM
You're talking about the huge gantries westbound on 139? Pretty sure those are Port Authority.
NJDOT maintains the roadway after the NBE split. The viaduct reconstruction was their project.
The gantries I'm referring to are before the split.
The Port Authority has signs that are on the new signal mast arms, and I think they still have that large gantry at Jersey Avenue with the large US 1-9 Text and "TURNPIKE" panels on it still. The PANYNJ uses I-78 shields, but NJDOT has "TO I-78" shields on their part of NJ 139.
Delaware was used at the NJ 73 ramp onto the NJT. Doug Kerr on gribblenation has a photo of the gantry after the Exit 4 Plaza in his New Jersey sign submission gallery..http://www.gribblenation.net/njpics/subs/njt4.jpg
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 06:39:56 PM
Quote from: Alex on June 28, 2012, 02:57:36 PMDelaware used to be used for one of the control points for the GSP exit onto the NJ Tpk southbound, though it was not replicated elsewhere on the Tpk mainline in North Jersey.
Actually, the control destination for NJTP southbound listed on the GSP southbound exit sign is Del. Mem. Bridge
Which is why I typed
used to. Definitely was the case in 1993.
Quote from: Alex on June 28, 2012, 11:19:10 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 06:39:56 PM
Quote from: Alex on June 28, 2012, 02:57:36 PMDelaware used to be used for one of the control points for the GSP exit onto the NJ Tpk southbound, though it was not replicated elsewhere on the Tpk mainline in North Jersey.
Actually, the control destination for NJTP southbound listed on the GSP southbound exit sign is Del. Mem. Bridge
Which is why I typed used to. Definitely was the case in 1993.
I've used that particular exit ramp during holiday weekends for nearly 22 years. IIRC, the older porcelain, button-copy signs that the current BGS' replaced had
Del. Mem. Bridge as a southbound Turnpike destination. The old NJTP signage
after the toll plaza (long since replaced) had
Trenton listed as a southbound destination.
I'll dig out my 1993 video from the GSP and see where those Delaware signs were. Memories tend to get fuzzy over long periods of time, so perhaps it was further north where I recall them.
Quote from: Alex on June 29, 2012, 10:30:30 AM
I'll dig out my 1993 video from the GSP and see where those Delaware signs were. Memories tend to get fuzzy over long periods of time, so perhaps it was further north where I recall them.
I remember when I lived up there, back in 89 there was a sign replacement that took place that eliminated the control cities after the toll plaza and had both I-95 and the text "TURNPIKE" with the redundant directional banners as both signs had one for each road. The Exit 8A plaza ramp had the same thing. At that time I was unaware of the change of I-95 so I thought it was erroneous at the time to see I-95 signed south of Exit 10. The 8A signs had to be changed when the NJT was widened from Exit 9 south to there in the late 80s. I do not know why the giant Exit 11 signs were replaced when generally the NJTA only replaces signs when they have to not at random.
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 28, 2012, 08:01:03 PM
i meant exit 6 to 7a including the NJTP extension into PA, i should have worded it better...
Well, they're officially I-95 already, even though they aren't signed due to the interchange in PA not being
done started yet. Google tends to go by what officially is defined regardless of signage.
Google tends to go by whatever someone manages to sneak in there.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 29, 2012, 10:58:39 AMI remember when I lived up there, back in 89 there was a sign replacement that took place that eliminated the control cities after the toll plaza and had both I-95 and the text "TURNPIKE" with the redundant directional banners as both signs had one for each road. The Exit 8A plaza ramp had the same thing. At that time I was unaware of the change of I-95 so I thought it was erroneous at the time to see I-95 signed south of Exit 10. The 8A signs had to be changed when the NJT was widened from Exit 9 south to there in the late 80s. I do not know why the giant Exit 11 signs were replaced when generally the NJTA only replaces signs when they have to not at random.
The NJTP signs at Exit 11 (following the toll plaza) were replaced sometime during the late 90s/early 2000s.
Quote from: NE2 on June 29, 2012, 12:17:16 PM
Google tends to go by whatever someone manages to sneak in there.
Looks like most of US 78 in MS and AL is labeled as I-22 and I don't think it's signed yet.
Quote from: deanej on June 29, 2012, 11:36:48 AM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 28, 2012, 08:01:03 PM
i meant exit 6 to 7a including the NJTP extension into PA, i should have worded it better...
Well, they're officially I-95 already, even though they aren't signed due to the interchange in PA not being done started yet. Google tends to go by what officially is defined regardless of signage.
The 6-7A section was added to 95 as part of the deal to officially kill off the Somerset Freeway.
Is prematurely signing any of I-95 on the southern portion of the NJ Turnpike a way for the state to make up for not building the planned Somerset stretch?
As far as Google Maps jumping the gun, they have done that on portions of future I-69 and future I-22. I-95 isn't so bad because most non-roadgeeks probably think all or most of the Turnpike is officially I-95 anyway.
And I-86. And I-478 in NY, but not 878. :confused: (Probably because there's already NY 878.)
Quote from: swbrotha100 on June 29, 2012, 09:14:14 PM
Is prematurely signing any of I-95 on the southern portion of the NJ Turnpike a way for the state to make up for not building the planned Somerset stretch?
It's not prematurely signed. South of exit 7A, it's a hidden interstate to avoid motorist confusion, but it was designated by the FHWA because there's no upgrades needed on that section pertaining to the I-95 designation.
i'm surprised google doesn't sign I-595 in Maryland.
I was on it the other day, the NB exit 6 arrow is way off, i did not have my phonecamera ready, but it is a bit too angular looking.
Quote from: deanej on June 30, 2012, 11:07:10 AM
Quote from: swbrotha100 on June 29, 2012, 09:14:14 PM
Is prematurely signing any of I-95 on the southern portion of the NJ Turnpike a way for the state to make up for not building the planned Somerset stretch?
It's not prematurely signed. South of exit 7A, it's a hidden interstate to avoid motorist confusion, but it was designated by the FHWA because there's no upgrades needed on that section pertaining to the I-95 designation.
You're correct. The NJDOT website confirms it. The current I-95 around Trenton that's signed is secretly labeled "95M" and the Western Spur of the Turnpike is secretly labeled "95W".
Quote from: swbrotha100 on July 04, 2012, 05:27:45 AM
the Western Spur of the Turnpike
Do you mean the connector to the PA Turnpike, or the western half where it splits up from I-280 to south of US 46?
I believe he means the western half of the spit; south of exit 6, the Turnpike is just the Turnpike.
In traffic reports and non road geek slang, it means the Exits 15W-16W-18W split to the west of Secaucus which is NJ 95W according to diagrams.
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2012, 11:30:55 AM
In traffic reports and non road geek slang, it means the Exits 15W-16W-18W split to the west of Secaucus which is NJ 95W according to diagrams.
How do traffic reporters and NJDOT and NJTPA refer to it?
I have seen in print "easterly alignment" and "westerly alignment".
Technically both are part of mainline I-95.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2012, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2012, 11:30:55 AM
In traffic reports and non road geek slang, it means the Exits 15W-16W-18W split to the west of Secaucus which is NJ 95W according to diagrams.
How do traffic reporters and NJDOT and NJTPA refer to it?
I have seen in print "easterly alignment" and "westerly alignment".
Technically both are part of mainline I-95.
WCBS-AM (880) says "eastern spur" and "western spur" on its traffic reports.
Traffic reporters usually use the terms "western spur" and "eastern spur" of the NJ Turnpike. On the NJDOT straight line diagrams, the PA Turnpike extenstion is officially I-95 already.
It will be interesting to see if any new signage will reflect I-95 when the widening project is finished on the Turnpike (Exits 6 to 8A).
Well I always remember it as being Eastern Spur and Western Spur when I was living in the area. It might of changed since then.
As far as both being part of I-95 you are correct! However, if you travel the I-95 lanes from the GWB SB, or the Turnpike mainline NB both at the split of the two alignments; you will see I-95 shields for the West roadway. The East roadway is signed for US 46 and I-80 NB and for Exit 17 SB. If you enter the NJT from either I-80, US 46, or the Vince Lombardi Plaza you will see the signs for SB I-95(Turnpike Mainline) leading you to the eastern road. Then "Exit 16W- Rutherford" is signed for the western way.
Interesting that they call it a "spur" when in fact it is not. They are parallel alignments of the same highway (NJTP and I-95).
Quote from: swbrotha100 on July 04, 2012, 03:06:43 PM
Traffic reporters usually use the terms "western spur" and "eastern spur" of the NJ Turnpike. On the NJDOT straight line diagrams, the PA Turnpike extenstion is officially I-95 already.
It will be interesting to see if any new signage will reflect I-95 when the widening project is finished on the Turnpike (Exits 6 to 8A).
There will be no I-95 signage, at least not immediately. Some panels have spaces reserved for I-95 shields, but they will not be placed until the direct ramp connectors at the Pa Turnpike interchange are complete, and that is about three (or so) years after the NJ widening is complete.
so signs like this will remain with no I-95 shields like a normal interstate?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8151%2F7000576272_5bb264531e_z.jpg&hash=6c9de7bfc3721c1a611a262b6c4e6b3cf6a1afae)
Quote from: YankeesFan on July 04, 2012, 06:52:16 PM
so signs like this will remain with no I-95 shields like a normal interstate?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8151%2F7000576272_5bb264531e_z.jpg&hash=6c9de7bfc3721c1a611a262b6c4e6b3cf6a1afae)
What are you talking about? They can squeeze a I-95 shield inbetween the Turnpike marker and the green arrow. :-)
Why not just put the I-95 signs on and cover them? That way, the sign is designed for them in the first place rather than have to cram in an ugly patch.
Or just leave the space. (Enough space, anyway.)
You'd still have an ugly patch though.
It's an ugly 50-lane highway. What do you expect?
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2012, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2012, 11:30:55 AM
In traffic reports and non road geek slang, it means the Exits 15W-16W-18W split to the west of Secaucus which is NJ 95W according to diagrams.
How do traffic reporters and NJDOT and NJTPA refer to it?
I have seen in print "easterly alignment" and "westerly alignment".
Technically both are part of mainline I-95.
What you've seen in print are the official designations, but "spur" is the common parlance. Also, not only does the FHWA consider I-95 to officially follow "95W", but the NJTA would most likely sign that as I-95 should the FHWA force them to choose one or the other. In the meantime, the Eastern Spur remains NJ SR 95.
Quote from: YankeesFan on July 04, 2012, 06:52:16 PM
so signs like this will remain with no I-95 shields like a normal interstate?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8151%2F7000576272_5bb264531e_z.jpg&hash=6c9de7bfc3721c1a611a262b6c4e6b3cf6a1afae)
Actually, they will use regular entrance signs. So photograph these while you can, they're disappearing.
For those wondering, the new pullthrough signs are up at Exit 7A northbound. No I-95 markers, just the Turnpike shield and the silly "THRU TRAFFIC" instead of a control city. The southbound overhead is sitting alongside the roadway and will likely be up shortly.
I don't see why they wouldn't sign I-95 on signs at least in the northbound direction on the mainline. You are north of the "gap" already, and even NJDOT has put up I-95 shields on their exit signs for the Turnpike on I-195. Those stupid I-95 shields with the Series D font and no direction banner are still randomly posted in the median too, so its not like the designation is a secret or anything,
Drove north again today. The signs definitely read "West [I-]276 [next line] Penn Turnpike," but the 276 shields are way off center to the right, with plenty of room for another shield to the left; I unaccountably failed to notice that last time. But there's definitely no "To," which suggests to me they'll read, in the future, "South [I-]95 West [I-]276 Penn Turnpike," which I'd interpret as a multiplex.
Well for all intents and purposes to the average motorist it is a multiplex. That ramp takes you to 276 and 95. The average driver doesn't care whether it gets you to 95 which then transitions into 276 or not, just that it gets him there.
Quote from: YankeesFan on July 04, 2012, 06:52:16 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8151%2F7000576272_5bb264531e_z.jpg&hash=6c9de7bfc3721c1a611a262b6c4e6b3cf6a1afae)
Something I've wondered about for some time but have never come across the answer: Is there a name for that older-type "squiggle" arrow, seen here, that some DOTs used to use on exit signage?
Do any DOTs still use it?
Quote from: qguy on July 12, 2012, 09:12:37 AM
Something I've wondered about for some time but have never come across the answer: Is there a name for that older-type "squiggle" arrow, seen here, that some DOTs used to use on exit signage?
I thought it was officially called "The NJ Turnpike Arrow"...
Quote from: Compulov on July 12, 2012, 08:27:51 PM
Quote from: qguy on July 12, 2012, 09:12:37 AM
Something I've wondered about for some time but have never come across the answer: Is there a name for that older-type "squiggle" arrow, seen here, that some DOTs used to use on exit signage?
I thought it was officially called "The NJ Turnpike Arrow"...
PennDOT used to use them as well. And I remember seeing them in some states along I-95 during a trip from Pennsylvania to Florida in 1978. Don't remember which states, though. (I was barely a
proto-roadgeek back then.)
I like them. I think the driver instinctively knows what they mean. It's not a turn arrow; it succinctly conveys the concept of exiting and slowing instead of splitting and maintaining speed or slowing and turning.
Of course, on exit signage they're usually seen at an angle instead of horizontal. I'm not sure they make as much sense when used as an entry arrow.
The NJT has several types of arrows called Turnpike Arrows. They're all disappearing, but you have the squiggle, and the long straight tapered arrow (similar but not to a Type A Extended), and the short straight tapered arrow (sometimes used at entrances). As for the Exit 6 signs, I believe the "TO" is greened over for now.
Quote from: Steve on July 12, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
The NJT has several types of arrows called Turnpike Arrows. They're all disappearing, but you have the squiggle, and the long straight tapered arrow (similar but not to a Type A Extended), and the short straight tapered arrow (sometimes used at entrances). As for the Exit 6 signs, I believe the "TO" is greened over for now.
Regarding the "TO" banner, you are correct.
So it's called a "Turnpike Arrow?"
now google has I-276 labeled in NJ...
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 26, 2012, 07:27:02 AM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on June 25, 2012, 09:52:20 PM
I guess US-130 doesn't get any love on the new Exit 6 signs, and shouldn't that be a "TO I-276"?
As stated upthread, there IS a "TO" in front of the 276 shield, it was just covered up with the 95 shield.
QuoteI still think Baltimore should be the southbound control city for NJ-700. Thats the direction most of the traffic is going anyway. NJDOT just sticks to plain old "Delaware" or "Del Mem Br" on all their signs.
I have never seen Delaware appear as a control city, and all the new signs feature Camden and then Wilmington if they have a control city at all (some of the new pull throughs retained THRU TRAFFIC). I agree that Baltimore would be a better fit since that is where the vast majority of traffic is going, but the NJTA (not NJDOT, btw) is always one to be different.
Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. :-P
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2012, 04:12:14 PM
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
I don't think posting "New York" instead of "New York City" is that big a deal. "New York" is/was common on a lot of highways in New Jersey that go to New York City.
I do wonder why Maryland doesn't use "Wilmington" more often as a control city on I-95 NB.
Quote from: swbrotha100 on July 16, 2012, 05:40:13 PM
I do wonder why Maryland doesn't use "Wilmington" more often as a control city on I-95 NB.
I think one mileage sign has Wilmington (the ones near the DE border in Cecil County) and Philadelphia on I-95 in MD the rest list New York City as their most distant point after Maryland destinations. I noticed that last weekend driving back to NJ from NC. Virginia doesn't recognize Philadelphia, Delaware, or Baltimore for that matter. All the pull throughs and distance signs in Northern VA direct drivers to "New York". There is a sign on I-95 north before the beltway that says "USE I-95 to NY - NJ" also.
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Depending on which official source you use. SR 0676 != Interstate Traffic Route 676 != FHWA's I-676.
Quote from: NE2 on July 16, 2012, 08:05:58 PM
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Depending on which official source you use. SR 0676 != Interstate Traffic Route 676 != FHWA's I-676.
Right, but there are few enough Interstates ending at (non-international border) state lines that I may as well use any qualification I can find.
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2012, 04:12:14 PM
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
Because "New York" is the name of the city.
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Well, that's just silly. And contradicted by signage on eastbound Vine, which treats the Ben Franklin as 676/30. (I know there's a traffic light or so each direction, but the many traffic lights on the Holland Tunnel approach don't prevent people claiming I-78 enters New York.)
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 17, 2012, 12:25:52 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Well, that's just silly. And contradicted by signage on eastbound Vine, which treats the Ben Franklin as 676/30. (I know there's a traffic light or so each direction, but the many traffic lights on the Holland Tunnel approach don't prevent people claiming I-78 enters New York.)
It is silly, but that's the way the FHWA defines it for whatever reason. Obviously PennDOT differs, and it makes sense to have continuous signage. FWIW, NJ never used the number 176 for any state route, but used all the others from 151 to 185. I have never seen any support as to why, but my opinion is that it would have made sense to make current 676 NJ into I-176, ending at US 30 before the toll booths, and then PA would have the FHWA definition of 676 to fit perfectly.
Quote from: empirestate on July 16, 2012, 11:15:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2012, 04:12:14 PM
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
Because "New York" is the name of the city.
It is also the name of the state, which is a much larger geographic area than the city. When posted on a sign several hundred miles away, which one is being referred to? Why not add "City" or "state" to make it clear?
Quote from: NJRoadfan on July 16, 2012, 07:36:50 PM
I think one mileage sign has Wilmington (the ones near the DE border in Cecil County) and Philadelphia on I-95 in MD the rest list New York City as their most distant point after Maryland destinations. I noticed that last weekend driving back to NJ from NC. Virginia doesn't recognize Philadelphia, Delaware, or Baltimore for that matter. All the pull throughs and distance signs in Northern VA direct drivers to "New York". There is a sign on I-95 north before the beltway that says "USE I-95 to NY - NJ" also.
You're a bit wrong on this. While the new signs on 95 in NoVA do include New York City, it is always (at least I can't think of an example otherwise) as a SECOND destination below another city (I believe Baltimore), and it is "New York City" not "New York".
Crappy photo turned up in 30 seconds of Googling: http://potomaclocal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/042511-NYC-road-sign.jpg
Quote from: Beltway on July 17, 2012, 06:16:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 16, 2012, 11:15:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2012, 04:12:14 PM
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
Because "New York" is the name of the city.
It is also the name of the state, which is a much larger geographic area than the city. When posted on a sign several hundred miles away, which one is being referred to? Why not add "City" or "state" to make it clear?
What I want to know is whose idea it was to make the city the same name as the state...
Quote from: YankeesFan on July 15, 2012, 09:12:27 PM
now google has I-276 labeled in NJ...
:banghead:
Quote from: Beltway on July 17, 2012, 06:16:09 AM
Quote from: empirestate on July 16, 2012, 11:15:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2012, 04:12:14 PM
<<< Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. >>>
They also post "New York", and not "New York City". Wonder why, as I-95 specifically goes thru the city itself, not just a corner of the state.
Because "New York" is the name of the city.
It is also the name of the state, which is a much larger geographic area than the city. When posted on a sign several hundred miles away, which one is being referred to? Why not add "City" or "state" to make it clear?
You certainly could, and people do. But since states aren't really supposed to be used as control destinations, there shouldn't be any ambiguity what is meant by "New York". Naturally, of course, there is.
And it should really be "city" rather than "City", since the word doesn't appear in the city's name. Or at least the consistent "City" and "State" (the usual practice). Or for real yuks, change all control destinations to the county of New York.
Quote from: empirestate on July 17, 2012, 08:25:02 AM
Or for real yuks, change all control destinations to the county of New York.
Sure, why not? It always works to fool the crooks on Law & Order!
Quote from: Steve on July 17, 2012, 12:28:31 AM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 17, 2012, 12:25:52 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Well, that's just silly. And contradicted by signage on eastbound Vine, which treats the Ben Franklin as 676/30. (I know there's a traffic light or so each direction, but the many traffic lights on the Holland Tunnel approach don't prevent people claiming I-78 enters New York.)
It is silly, but that's the way the FHWA defines it for whatever reason. Obviously PennDOT differs, and it makes sense to have continuous signage. FWIW, NJ never used the number 176 for any state route, but used all the others from 151 to 185. I have never seen any support as to why, but my opinion is that it would have made sense to make current 676 NJ into I-176, ending at US 30 before the toll booths, and then PA would have the FHWA definition of 676 to fit perfectly.
The biggest reason for this is that the only freeway-to-freeway connection between the Ben Franklin Bridge (I-676, at least in NJ) and PA's I-676 is the ramp from the bridge (westbound as it touches down in PA) to eastbound I-676. All other connections require using surface streets.
So not only is the driver forced to use surface streets to continue on I-676, but technically the Ben Franklin Bridge isn't even officially designated I-676 until it crosses the NJ state line in the middle of the Delaware River. Although this second point isn't apparent to the casual observer.
This is why this "connection" is often called "Philadelphia's Breezewood."
<<< You certainly could, and people do. But since states aren't really supposed to be used as control destinations, there shouldn't be any ambiguity what is meant by "New York". Naturally, of course, there is. >>
Of course, there is, and the public in general doesn't know that. Witness posted control destinations such as "New England", "Indiana", "Illinois", "Wisconsin", "Iowa", etc.
Quote from: qguy on July 17, 2012, 08:55:27 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 17, 2012, 12:28:31 AM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 17, 2012, 12:25:52 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Well, that's just silly. And contradicted by signage on eastbound Vine, which treats the Ben Franklin as 676/30. (I know there's a traffic light or so each direction, but the many traffic lights on the Holland Tunnel approach don't prevent people claiming I-78 enters New York.)
It is silly, but that's the way the FHWA defines it for whatever reason. Obviously PennDOT differs, and it makes sense to have continuous signage. FWIW, NJ never used the number 176 for any state route, but used all the others from 151 to 185. I have never seen any support as to why, but my opinion is that it would have made sense to make current 676 NJ into I-176, ending at US 30 before the toll booths, and then PA would have the FHWA definition of 676 to fit perfectly.
The biggest reason for this is that the only freeway-to-freeway connection between the Ben Franklin Bridge (I-676, at least in NJ) and PA's I-676 is the ramp from the bridge (westbound as it touches down in PA) to eastbound I-676. All other connections require using surface streets.
So not only is the driver forced to use surface streets to continue on I-676, but technically the Ben Franklin Bridge isn't even officially designated I-676 until it crosses the NJ state line in the middle of the Delaware River. Although this second point isn't apparent to the casual observer.
This is why this "connection" is often called "Philadelphia's Breezewood."
I like to see I-676 PA and I-676 NJ as two separate highways that are signed together merely for convenience's sake.
Quote from: Beltway on July 17, 2012, 09:40:17 AM
<<< You certainly could, and people do. But since states aren't really supposed to be used as control destinations, there shouldn't be any ambiguity what is meant by "New York". Naturally, of course, there is. >>
Of course, there is, and the public in general doesn't know that. Witness posted control destinations such as "New England", "Indiana", "Illinois", "Wisconsin", "Iowa", etc.
Penna? Shore Points? :)
As a kid I always thought there was a town named "Shore Points" which I-195 through Jersey ran to.
Quote from: qguy on July 17, 2012, 08:55:27 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 17, 2012, 12:28:31 AM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 17, 2012, 12:25:52 AM
Quote from: Steve on July 16, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on June 19, 2012, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 19, 2012, 06:29:36 PM
Quote from: YankeesFan on June 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
not that it matters now because of I-95 but why wasn't it designated as I-276? NJ seems like it is so anti-interstate.
Think it was because it had no direct connection to any interstate before the addition of turnpike mileage to I-95 north of Exit 6.
Devil's advocate time: so why wasn't I-276 extended up to Exit 7A to end at I-195? It could even have ended at US 206 at Exit 7, or EVEN 130 at Exit 6A. State line makes less sense than a US or I- highway.
Is there another instance where an Interstate ends at a state line (with no interchange there), whether it becomes an unnumbered road or just downgrades to a state route?
Same state, your city: I-676 NJ ends at the state line, I-676 PA begins at I-95.
Well, that's just silly. And contradicted by signage on eastbound Vine, which treats the Ben Franklin as 676/30. (I know there's a traffic light or so each direction, but the many traffic lights on the Holland Tunnel approach don't prevent people claiming I-78 enters New York.)
It is silly, but that's the way the FHWA defines it for whatever reason. Obviously PennDOT differs, and it makes sense to have continuous signage. FWIW, NJ never used the number 176 for any state route, but used all the others from 151 to 185. I have never seen any support as to why, but my opinion is that it would have made sense to make current 676 NJ into I-176, ending at US 30 before the toll booths, and then PA would have the FHWA definition of 676 to fit perfectly.
The biggest reason for this is that the only freeway-to-freeway connection between the Ben Franklin Bridge (I-676, at least in NJ) and PA's I-676 is the ramp from the bridge (westbound as it touches down in PA) to eastbound I-676. All other connections require using surface streets.
So not only is the driver forced to use surface streets to continue on I-676, but technically the Ben Franklin Bridge isn't even officially designated I-676 until it crosses the NJ state line in the middle of the Delaware River. Although this second point isn't apparent to the casual observer.
This is why this "connection" is often called "Philadelphia's Breezewood."
Not to hijack this thread but, it is also worth noting and to keep in mind that prior to 1973-74, the I-76 and 676 designations between 30th St. Station and Gloucester City, NJ were the
reverse of what's there now. So, at one time, I-676 indeed
was a continuous freeway from end-to-end. The reasoning behind the number swap was probably due to the fact that construction of the eastern half of the Vine Expressway (which originally included direct connections to/from the Ben Franklin Bridge as well as direct connection from I-95 to the bridge) was hopelessly delayed at the time.
In both PennDOT's & NJDOT's minds, it was likely viewed that it was better to have the parent highway (I-76) aligned on an already-completed highway and that the newer highway (if built - ultimately the Vine Expressway) receive the child designation of I-676.
Quote from: Michael in Philly on July 16, 2012, 12:25:50 PM
Maryland seems to be unaware that there's anything significant on 95 between Baltimore and New York, so it's their karma. :-P
Years ago, the "control city" for northbound entrance ramps to the JFK Highway section of I-95 in Maryland used to read "N.J. Turnpike."
Quote from: NJRoadfan on July 16, 2012, 07:36:50 PM
I think one mileage sign has Wilmington (the ones near the DE border in Cecil County) and Philadelphia on I-95 in MD the rest list New York City as their most distant point after Maryland destinations. I noticed that last weekend driving back to NJ from NC. Virginia doesn't recognize Philadelphia, Delaware, or Baltimore for that matter. All the pull throughs and distance signs in Northern VA direct drivers to "New York". There is a sign on I-95 north before the beltway that says "USE I-95 to NY - NJ" also.
Philadelphia is also shown on a mileage sign on I-95 just north of the rest area in Howard County (a not-very-legible GSV shot here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=north+laurel,+maryland&hl=en&ll=39.143425,-76.844838&spn=0.00907,0.013196&hnear=North+Laurel,+Howard,+Maryland&gl=us&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=39.143561,-76.844734&panoid=hpZPEPRBeZVRPncp_dHKxQ&cbp=12,78.07,,1,-3.59)).
I asked a friend of mine at the turnpike and he said that the signs read new york down south in the turnpikes 2 lane section because new york city makes for a wider pull thru sign and it won't fit along side their wide exit direction sign when it implements that large swiggly arrow when the two are placed on the truss together.
He also said that AASHTO requires the "city" to be there.
Up north where the trusses are wider, city will be added.
I guess NY has been in violation all these years then... even our control cities for NYC all say New York!
If they don't have enough space to say "New York City", they could say "NY City" ... and it's shorter!!
Quote from: Beltway on July 18, 2012, 01:47:01 PM
If they don't have enough space to say "New York City", they could say "NY City" ... and it's shorter!!
They do sometimes; I believe it's Connecticut that does it that way.
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on July 17, 2012, 09:37:45 PM
He also said that AASHTO requires the "city" to be there.
They do show it that way on their control cities list; I don't know whether that's meant to officially sanction that version over others. Certainly it does no harm, and may well do some good, to write "New York City" instead of just "New York", but since somebody was asking why you might find the second rather than the first, I was just answering that it could be because "New York" is actually the city's name, so they might have chosen it for that reason.
(Likewise, if you were making a map you wouldn't properly label it as "New York City", and you wouldn't need to for clarity reasons either, since the fact that there's a city symbol with those two words next to it already means you're referring to the city and not the state.)
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on July 17, 2012, 09:37:45 PM
He also said that AASHTO requires the "city" to be there.
That's odd, because the official name of the city is New York.
Quote from: Steve on July 18, 2012, 06:56:03 PM
Quote from: Don'tKnowYet on July 17, 2012, 09:37:45 PM
He also said that AASHTO requires the "city" to be there.
That's odd, because the official name of the city is New York.
That is true, but it is also the official name of the state.
The city's official website typically refers to it as "New York City" or "City of New York". See http://www.nyc.gov/
I would think that the label include either "city" or "state" to ensure that it is clear as to which is being referred to.
You could refer specifically to the city by writing the official names of each, "New York, New York". But it is shorter to write "New York City" or "City of New York".
Quote from: Beltway on July 18, 2012, 09:44:39 PM
The city's official website typically refers to it as "New York City" or "City of New York". See http://www.nyc.gov/
I would think that the label include either "city" or "state" to ensure that it is clear as to which is being referred to.
You could refer specifically to the city by writing the official names of each, "New York, New York". But it is shorter to write "New York City" or "City of New York".
I'm surprised not more signs just use "NYC". Yes, I know there's a *lot* wrong with that... but if you're travelling on the I-95 system (or getting on at an onramp somewhere) and heading in the general direction of NY, it would be quick and obvious (I think... but I've grown up in NJ, and there's a whole discussion somewhere else about Newark, DE vs. Newark, NJ). Especially if NJDOT can get away with "Philla" and "Penna" on signs...
Why not them just spell out "New York City" ?
Some cities just have a long name ... such as ...
Philadelphia
Washington (most signs leave out the "D.C.")
Charlottesville
Chancellorsville
Connecticut liked to use N Y City.