NJ Turnpike Construction rolls on

[Steve D]

Steve - which "quad" in Twin Rivers did you live?  I was in Quad I from 1970 to '74; we were the original owners of a house on Bennington.  All the schools I went to were in Hightstown, which means my school buses passed under the Turnpike and the trumpet ramps every day.   Amazing how close the interchange is to Twin Rivers now.

We lived in quad 3 (haven't heard that term in years).  Here's some trivia - when I was in first grade our school bus driver pointed out a small house being loaded onto a trailer.  She said it was to make way for "a road".  That house was removed almost 40 years ago but the land stood vacant almost 25 years before they finally built route 133 (instead of planned route 92, another story).  The house sat right where the base of the SPUI overpass is in the picture on the north side of 33.  There was also a Sunoco on that site that closed in the 1970s. 

[ChezeHed81]

To complement Mr. Matté's photos of the new temporary diverge north of exit 8A, here are some direct shots from a Feb 16 trip between the Delaware Memorial Bridge and Exit 14C.


2 Mile Guide


1 Mile Guide


Diverge Point

The beloved rotating drum signs are covered over and being prep'ed for removal.

At Exit 7A, the last of the remaining button copy signs were the gore signs in both directions, and the one southbound at the start of the deceleration lane.  Its replacement was already mounted on a gantry to the side of the roadway, awaiting installation.

The art deco-ish sign structures are still in place along the PA Turnpike extension.  The construction cones in the vicinity make for a comfy place to pull behind, stop, roll down the window, and take a few shots from a still vehicle.  Turnpike reg's say no stopping, so I don't endorse this, but I did find it convenient nonetheless.

[1995hoo]

Is it fair to assume the psychedelic green-and-black look of those signs is simply a function of the camera rather than the actual color?

BTW, interesting to note it's now "Trucks/Buses/Cars" rather than "Cars/Trucks/Buses."

[agentsteel53]

Is it fair to assume the psychedelic green-and-black look of those signs is simply a function of the camera rather than the actual color?

yes.  it all has to do with the refresh rate of the display subcomponents vs. the shutter speed.

[1995hoo]

Is it fair to assume the psychedelic green-and-black look of those signs is simply a function of the camera rather than the actual color?

yes.  it all has to do with the refresh rate of the display subcomponents vs. the shutter speed.

Thanks. Figured as much. It's similar to the reason why photos of video boards in sports venues often don't come out well either. I must say the mottled green and black DOES look kinda cool, though.

[NJRoadfan]

It could be a side effect of rolling shutter on newer CMOS sensor digital cameras. One of these days I'll get a shot of these signs using my CCD sensor digital camera and see if it creates the same effect.

[vdeane]

Those diverge signs look awfully permanent for what's supposed to be a temporary diverge point.

[BrianP]

Those diverge signs look awfully permanent for what's supposed to be a temporary diverge point.

Notice that there are 3 signs there.  And the one to the right is not used.  The middle sign might just be temporary.  But the other two will serve the inner and outer roadway.

Notice also in the second photo there is already a VMS for the outer roadway.

[KEVIN_224]

Damn! With the green squares, I thought H&R Block was sponsoring this part of the highway!

[lepidopteran]

Steve - which "quad" in Twin Rivers did you live?  I was in Quad I from 1970 to '74; we were the original owners of a house on Bennington.  All the schools I went to were in Hightstown, which means my school buses passed under the Turnpike and the trumpet ramps every day.   Amazing how close the interchange is to Twin Rivers now.

We lived in quad 3 (haven't heard that term in years).  Here's some trivia - when I was in first grade our school bus driver pointed out a small house being loaded onto a trailer.  She said it was to make way for "a road".  That house was removed almost 40 years ago but the land stood vacant almost 25 years before they finally built route 133 (instead of planned route 92, another story).  The house sat right where the base of the SPUI overpass is in the picture on the north side of 33.  There was also a Sunoco on that site that closed in the 1970s.

I do remember a gas station across the T-intersection with Milford Rd., but I didn't know what brand it was.  There was also an Exxon station inside the gore area with Monmouth St. which closed sometime before NJ-133 was built.  Not to mention the Exxon on the corner of Milford which was open right until it had to make way for the new NJTP ramps.  Of course, both stations were Esso originally.

Since you lived in Quad 3, did you know that originally, Probasco Rd. ended at a T-intersection with Wyckoffs Mill Rd.?  Wyckoffs Mill ran to the right for about 100 yards before making a 90° turn to the (approximate) north, as shown here:
http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=4E-06&lat=40.2727476014195&lon=-74.4935789999999&year=1970

When they started building Quad 3, Probasco was re-aligned.  40 years later, you can still see a trace of where Probasco originally ran slightly to the west:
http://binged.it/ZhSdfe

My father worked at the research lab on Wyckoffs Mill that abutted the NJTP.  It was called "National Lead", until about 1971 when it was renamed "NL Industries"; a ground-level sign reading one then the other faced the Turnpike.  Although that building was apparently abandoned some 25 years ago (still standing, though all but rotting away; "Weird NJ" anyone?) a spheroid water tower with a faded "NL" logo is still plainly visible from the NJTP.
http://binged.it/ZhTLpB

Although I have no official proof of this, I think Twin Rivers got its name from the "twin" rivers that abut the development; Rocky Brook to the south, and the Millstone River to the north.  Looking at the old maps, I suspect that the ill-fated NJ-92 was supposed to pretty much follow the Millstone all the way to Princeton.  Anyone know for sure?

P.S.:  Steve D -- check your messages

[NJRoadfan]

Those diverge signs look awfully permanent for what's supposed to be a temporary diverge point.

They are going to be there for awhile. Once the new lanes are complete, traffic will be diverted to them while the inner lanes get rehabbed. I wouldn't be surprised if these signs get moved to the new dual-dual split south of Exit 6 when construction is complete as they are pretty expensive.

[lepidopteran]

Those diverge signs look awfully permanent for what's supposed to be a temporary diverge point.

... I wouldn't be surprised if these signs get moved to the new dual-dual split south of Exit 6 when construction is complete as they are pretty expensive.

Why not just move the same rotating-drum signs they were using until recently at the Exit 8A split down to Exit 6?  I remember when the split was moved from Exit 10 to Exit 9, and it looked to me like the same signs were used, just moved.

There are still quite a few variable signs with the rotating drums at several exits, not to mention service plazas, at the point where the on-ramp diverges.  I wonder if their days are numbered?  Or what type of signs were ordered for the dividing on-ramps for Exits 6-8, and 8A SB?

[SignBridge]

I would take a guess that the rotating drum signs are antiquated by today's standards, and those old ones are probably worn out anyway. Ever notice those drums sometimes a little out of position and hard to read? Mechanical devices are less preferable in this electronic era. I wouldn't be surprised if NJTA uses electronic VMS similar to the those shown in the above photos.

Steve seems to know a lot about what's going on with the signing. Maybe he could fill us in on what signs are planned for the new northbound split.

[Alps]

I would take a guess that the rotating drum signs are antiquated by today's standards, and those old ones are probably worn out anyway. Ever notice those drums sometimes a little out of position and hard to read? Mechanical devices are less preferable in this electronic era. I wouldn't be surprised if NJTA uses electronic VMS similar to the those shown in the above photos.

Steve seems to know a lot about what's going on with the signing. Maybe he could fill us in on what signs are planned for the new northbound split.

Can't actually help you on that one.

[J N Winkler]

What I know is that the NJTA advertised, for a March 5 letting, contract number A600.277, for signing improvements on the NJ Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.  The bid quantities include 55,000 SF of sign panel (48,000 SF overhead and 7,000 SF ground-mounted), and the construction plans have over 500 sheets.  This is unusually large as signing contracts go.  The last signing contract I have seen with this sheet count was the MoDOT signing contract for I-49.

Unfortunately, as of January 1 this year, the NJTA has changed its advertising and bidding procedures for construction contracts.  Under the old system, the NJTA would pass bidding plans to a blueprint company, which would put TIFF scans online for casual viewing (a set of paper plans could be ordered for a fee).  Under the new system, NJTA passes the construction plans to Bid Express to put online as part of their premium plansheet service, which used to be--and may still be--$100 a month on top of the $35 monthly subscription fee.

I am looking for better options for getting a continuing feed of NJTA construction plans but, so far, it is not looking good.  It is really quite unfortunate and inconvenient that neither transportation agency in New Jersey makes construction plans available online for hassle-free download.

[Alps]

What I know is that the NJTA advertised, for a March 5 letting, contract number A600.277, for signing improvements on the NJ Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.  The bid quantities include 55,000 SF of sign panel (48,000 SF overhead and 7,000 SF ground-mounted), and the construction plans have over 500 sheets.  This is unusually large as signing contracts go.  The last signing contract I have seen with this sheet count was the MoDOT signing contract for I-49.

Unfortunately, as of January 1 this year, the NJTA has changed its advertising and bidding procedures for construction contracts.  Under the old system, the NJTA would pass bidding plans to a blueprint company, which would put TIFF scans online for casual viewing (a set of paper plans could be ordered for a fee).  Under the new system, NJTA passes the construction plans to Bid Express to put online as part of their premium plansheet service, which used to be--and may still be--$100 a month on top of the $35 monthly subscription fee.

I am looking for better options for getting a continuing feed of NJTA construction plans but, so far, it is not looking good.  It is really quite unfortunate and inconvenient that neither transportation agency in New Jersey makes construction plans available online for hassle-free download.

I wonder what's available under OPRA? I know that's a terrible hassle to go through each time but it may actually work.

[jeffandnicole]

Going Northbound on the NJ Turnpike prior to the future diverge, the bases for new signage in the median and right shoudler have been constructed at approximately the 2 mile ahead and 1 mile ahead point.  At the future diverge point itself (about where there would be 4 or 5 lanes), there's a new variable message sign there, although only the same size as the others found along the road.

This would make a great location for one of those extra large VMS, such as the ones found at the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

[J N Winkler]

I wonder what's available under OPRA? I know that's a terrible hassle to go through each time but it may actually work.

I will go through OPRA if I have to, but it is a last resort.  I have no firsthand experience with the process, but Randy Hersh did, and shared with me the results and his correspondence with NJDOT officials.  It is my understanding that under OPRA, structural plans are not considered public record, and it is NJDOT policy not to provide them.  Bridge plans are considered structural, but I am not sure whether this applies to sign structures (a point which is relevant for this contract since the bid quantities list 57 full-width gantries and 15 cantilever structures).  In the case of the NJTA, a more serious problem may be that the agency does not have the plans in electronic format, as was the case several years ago when Randy inquired as to the possibility of obtaining the 6-9 widening plans in electronic format.  (He took the inquiries no further when I discovered we had the access for viewing which we have just lost.)  I am not sure availability on paper only still prevails, but in the bid proposal NJTA lists a number of past projects which are relevant to this one and advises contractors that they may obtain prints of them from the NJTA's records person.

My personal philosophy is that these plans are not going to go away, so I can play a long game if I have to.

[cpzilliacus]

This would make a great location for one of those extra large VMS, such as the ones found at the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

I  agree.  Those VMS units at the bridge approaches are superb. 

[vdeane]

Those diverge signs look awfully permanent for what's supposed to be a temporary diverge point.

They are going to be there for awhile. Once the new lanes are complete, traffic will be diverted to them while the inner lanes get rehabbed. I wouldn't be surprised if these signs get moved to the new dual-dual split south of Exit 6 when construction is complete as they are pretty expensive.

So how many years until the diverge point is at exit 6?

[jeffandnicole]

2014 is the projected construction end date.

[Steve D]

2014 is the projected construction end date.

I think summer 2014 for completing all of the new work.  Then traffic will be shifted to the new outer lanes while the inner lanes are repaved only (no bridges re-built) by fall 2014. 

From what I remember reading the old drum-style variable signs are not going to be used for new signs in the 6-9 section but this is not confirmed.

[vdeane]

2014 is the projected construction end date.

I think summer 2014 for completing all of the new work.  Then traffic will be shifted to the new outer lanes while the inner lanes are repaved only (no bridges re-built) by fall 2014. 

From what I remember reading the old drum-style variable signs are not going to be used for new signs in the 6-9 section but this is not confirmed.

Wow, that's a lot different from how it would go in NY.  It would take 2-3 years to get the inner lanes rebuilt here.  And we use construction zone signage for anything that's not permanent, even if the sign will be up for 10 years.

[jeffandnicole]

It appears the old ramps at Interchange 7A are now closed.  A temporary loop ramp from the 'pike NB to the toll plaza is now open, along with the long flyover/under/over ramp from the toll plaza to the Turnpike's future inner lanes NB.

[Alps]

2014 is the projected construction end date.

I think summer 2014 for completing all of the new work.  Then traffic will be shifted to the new outer lanes while the inner lanes are repaved only (no bridges re-built) by fall 2014. 

From what I remember reading the old drum-style variable signs are not going to be used for new signs in the 6-9 section but this is not confirmed.

There will be new hybrid signs on ramps with a combination of drums and a VMS.