Should The New Jersey Turnpike Standardize BGS and Exit Signs?

[mapman1071]

The NJ Turnpike BGS are pre-Interstate Design! Should The New Jersey Turnpike Standardize BGS and Exit Signs?
Is There any Other Interstate Highway, Freeway or Expressway with this BGS Design.

[NJRoadfan]

Unless the feds force them to, its not likely. The only section that the feds can withhold funding for non-compliance is the section north of US-46. It would be nice to get some standard signing and mileage based exit numbers for I-95, but it will likely never happen.

[Alps]

Mod note revised - this is too NJ centric.

Only after the Turnpike/95 connection in PA is built will we know whether I-95 will be signed along Exit 6 / PA Extension or not.  But yes, because the Turnpike is self-funded, they get to decide what they want without interference.

As for other highways with unique signage, you have some very interesting fonts on the Atlantic City Expressway (sorry, couldn't even leave the state with another example).  But at least they use exit tabs and are mileage based.  (Garden State Parkway, although owned by the Turnpike Authority, remains basically to DOT standards or at least former standards in BGS design - but there is a lot of variation about what is acceptable.)

[akotchi]

The Interchange 6 guide signs will include I-95 in their final design when the Interchange 6 to 9 Widening is complete (at least based on the design plans), but the shields and other "incriminating" information will be covered until the Pa interchange is complete, whenever that is . . . 

The widening program is also supposed to include I-95 shields on the pull-through signs, again subject to the prerequisite interchange completion.

[ctsignguy]

Actually, i kind of like the NJ Tpke BGS signs and would like to see them left alone for as long as possible....

For me at least, for so many years, the various Northeast toll roads have unique signage which allowed me to take a nap in my parents car back in the day....then wake up, and tell where i was just by the sign design


The NJ Tpke signs are a last vestige to those long-gone days when states didnt have to be THAT uniform in their signage, and in my mind,should be preserved for as long as they are actually usable in service.

[Ian]

I honestly think they should keep their current unique signage, since ya know, its unique. Where else today can you find freeway signage where the exit number and the distance to said exit on the same line? I am so-so on weather they should change their exit numbers to mile based, since I am fine with both. I also think that the turnpike should be signed as I-95 a little bit better. Occasional median I-95 shields are ok, but a little more ressurance could be acceptable. Otherwise, leave the turnpike be, and leave the classic button copy signs until they rot .

[Roadgeek Adam]

Before the current ones, NJ Turnpike had even older more unique hump sign designs

[Duke87]

The signage, while non-standard, is perfectly understandable. Thus, there really isn't anything wrong with it. Indeed, changing it out for standard signage would be a huge loss of character for the Turnpike (as would using standard lane striping).

As for the exit numbers... the New Jersey Turnpike is the one highway I will excuse for being sequential. The numbers themselves are just too culturally ingrained to change. Do we really want a turnpike that has Giants Stadium at exit 113W, the Holland Tunnel at exit N6 (or 65, using I-78 mileage), Six Flags off exit 61, etc.?

[J N Winkler]

I also wouldn't make an utilty argument for getting rid of the Turnpike's existing signing system.  It diverges from that diagrammed in the MUTCD, but it actually conforms fairly closely to MUTCD signing principles, and the Turnpike is its own closed corridor so the Turnpike signs are seen on their own and are unlikely to cause confusion as a result of different design.

I would observe, though, that many designers have trouble composing fully pattern-accurate sign designs for the Turnpike, just because the arrows are so different.  It is not uncommon, for example, for designers to use the arrow on the reverse-curve warning sign to fake the Turnpike Type D arrow.

Judging from the signing plans I have seen, the GSP has a pretty vanilla MUTCD implementation, but there is extensive use of yellow bottom panels for toll-related messages.

[Alps]

Regarding the arrow - one thing the Authority is much better about than other agencies, at least as far as the Turnpike goes, is making sure everything appears correctly.  (The Parkway, I'm leaving that matter alone for now - too much to discuss in this space.)  Regarding lane striping, the Authority came up with the 25/25 back well before lane striping was standardized, part of the same experimentation that led to the Jersey barrier (see the median of US 322 west of US 40 for perhaps the last remaining stretch of experiment).  The reason they still hang on to 25/25 is that according to them, it's more visible by the high volumes of truckers on the Turnpike.  (Oh yeah, and they're 6" wide instead of 4".)  They also claim that there is no loss of visibility caused by the lane lines being too long and seeming to be solid instead of dashed, something that I would dispute from personal experience, but hey, it's one of the safest roads around, so who am I to argue?

[roadfro]

I typically like things to be standardized, especially road signs. So I would say the signs should eventually be standardized.

The operative word there being "eventually". As long as the signs have messages which are readily understood or unlikely to cause driver confusing, and are clear and readable according to modern standards, there's no need to go replacing serviceable signage.

[Ian]

I think that if they ever modernize their signage, they should at least keep that cool arrow J N Winkler mentioned. It's one of the reasons why I like the Turnpike's signage so much.

[ctsignguy]

VERY cool NJ Tpke signs




UN-cool NJ Tpke signs

[NJRoadfan]

Regarding lane striping, the Authority came up with the 25/25 back well before lane striping was standardized, part of the same experimentation that led to the Jersey barrier (see the median of US 322 west of US 40 for perhaps the last remaining stretch of experiment).  The reason they still hang on to 25/25 is that according to them, it's more visible by the high volumes of truckers on the Turnpike.  (Oh yeah, and they're 6" wide instead of 4".)  They also claim that there is no loss of visibility caused by the lane lines being too long and seeming to be solid instead of dashed, something that I would dispute from personal experience, but hey, it's one of the safest roads around, so who am I to argue?

It has the side effect of making one drive faster. Everyone is used to the "standard" skip lines. Longer lines make it appear that you are crawling along at 65mph. Its interesting to hear that pull through signs on the mainline will finally have I-95 shields (south of the spurs anyway), control cities would be nice too instead of TURNPIKE NORTH/SOUTH. I also found it ironic that a well funded toll road has some of the oldest worn out signs in the state. I guess one can say its fiscal responsibility.

[Don'tKnowYet]

The NJTA does not get to operate "without interference".  They are under the umbrella of the same chairman that runs the NJDOT.  Funding may be withheld from the DOT for the actions of the NJTA.  It has been threatened twice before - in 1990 and 1994.

[Don'tKnowYet]

Unless the feds force them to, its not likely. The only section that the feds can withhold funding for non-compliance is the section north of US-46. It would be nice to get some standard signing and mileage based exit numbers for I-95, but it will likely never happen.

That makes no sense how funding can be held for certain corridors.  Whatever.

[Don'tKnowYet]

The signage, while non-standard, is perfectly understandable. Thus, there really isn't anything wrong with it. Indeed, changing it out for standard signage would be a huge loss of character for the Turnpike (as would using standard lane striping).

As for the exit numbers... the New Jersey Turnpike is the one highway I will excuse for being sequential. The numbers themselves are just too culturally ingrained to change. Do we really want a turnpike that has Giants Stadium at exit 113W, the Holland Tunnel at exit N6 (or 65, using I-78 mileage), Six Flags off exit 61, etc.?

The W suffix is not permitted per Sec. 2E.17.  So, that being said if the Turnpike was to renumber its exits, one of the spurs has to change in its entirety.  You can't have Exit 109W (or whatever 15 W would become) and Exit 110 E (for Exit 15 X or whatever they are).  That's AASHTO policy.  In fact, it's AASHTO policy now, oh right, Turnpike can do whatver it wants.

[hbelkins]

AASHTO doesn't have policy. FHWA, maybe, and if that's true there are a lot of violations of this "policy" about E and W suffixes.

[agentsteel53]

AASHTO doesn't have policy. FHWA, maybe, and if that's true there are a lot of violations of this "policy" about E and W suffixes.

I think this situation is unique, in that the E and W represent not halves of an interchange on the same road, but rather two separate roads.  Logically, the two exits are best explained as E15 and W15.  I can't think of another road offhand that has this.

[froggie]

Technically, the MUTCD *IS* FHWA policy...

[J N Winkler]

It has been threatened twice before - in 1990 and 1994.

What were the issues at stake in those instances?

[ATLRedSoxFan]

I always liked the Southbound Art-deco style gantry for the PA Turnpike connector exit (Exit 6, I think?) on the NJTP. With all the improvements made over the years, that gantry AFAIK is still in existance. I hope they find a way to keep it when 95 is rerouted.

[signalman]

I always liked the Southbound Art-deco style gantry for the PA Turnpike connector exit (Exit 6, I think?) on the NJTP. With all the improvements made over the years, that gantry AFAIK is still in existance. I hope they find a way to keep it when 95 is rerouted.

It is infact Exit 6 and it was still standing last month when I passed under it.  I like it also and hope it survives 95's southward rerouting.  However, with the ongoing widening project, I fear it will one day be removed.

[Roadgeek Adam]

Yeah its still there, and only one of the few left.

[Don'tKnowYet]

AASHTO doesn't have policy. FHWA, maybe, and if that's true there are a lot of violations of this "policy" about E and W suffixes.

Incorrect.  You are referred to Item 7 of the PURPOSE AND POLICY IN THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF UNITED STATES NUMBERED HIGHWAYS by AASHTO. 

And try not to get into that policy says US Routes.  Item 7 holds true for both US Routes and Interstates Highways.