New Jersey

[SignBridge]

https://goo.gl/maps/qdPUHNPi3Z1ajWLV6
I love how NJ DOT is inconsistent with the control cities here. Being the NJTA uses Metuchen and Perth Amboy for Exit 10 on the NJ Turnpike. This here is the ramp leading from Exit 10 to its distributed freeways. Yet no mention of either control points that were primary for the ramp.

I believe the MUTCD does recommend (if not require) message consistency thru sign sequences of that sort. But good luck with that in the real world.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/qdPUHNPi3Z1ajWLV6
I love how NJ DOT is inconsistent with the control cities here. Being the NJTA uses Metuchen and Perth Amboy for Exit 10 on the NJ Turnpike. This here is the ramp leading from Exit 10 to its distributed freeways. Yet no mention of either control points that were primary for the ramp.

I believe the MUTCD does recommend (if not require) message consistency thru sign sequences of that sort. But good luck with that in the real world.

Not only that but Woodbridge is for CR 514 EB. I-287 don't get anything here even Mahwah. You figure an interstate to interstate ramp would acknowledge a control city for the connecting route. Guess not.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/roRe3HtZNyE1zsnJA
I lived in the Edison/ Fords area for three years in the late eighties. We never had issues with overheight vehicles hitting this low bridge.

WTF are truckers really getting so dumb that they need to idiot proof this underpass. Heck, Durham, NC proves warning flashers don't grab attention of the most ignorant.

[SignBridge]

https://goo.gl/maps/roRe3HtZNyE1zsnJA
I lived in the Edison/ Fords area for three years in the late eighties. We never had issues with overheight vehicles hitting this low bridge.

WTF are truckers really getting so dumb that they need to idiot proof this underpass. Heck, Durham, NC proves warning flashers don't grab attention of the most ignorant.

Yes, it looks like truckers are getting dumber by the year. We have an ever increasing problem on Long Island with big rigs getting onto our restricted parkways with their low bridges. This is despite signage, flashing lights, etc. The problem as I understand it is that they are relying on passenger car type GPS's instead of reading the signs or using the more expensive commercial truck GPS's.

[CrystalWalrein]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea’s dredging equipment or NJDOT didn’t want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

[Alps]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea's dredging equipment or NJDOT didn't want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

Given that someone in this very forum has one of these signs (not me), I assume that is why they disappeared.

[jeffandnicole]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea's dredging equipment or NJDOT didn't want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

The most recent GSV I'm seeing is from 10 years ago, prior to the installation of the milemarkers, including the 1.5. 

As Alps mentioned, one of the 0.5 mms went walking. The others may have walked as well.

This is still under NJDOTs jurisdiction, but they don't do much with it.

[CrystalWalrein]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea's dredging equipment or NJDOT didn't want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

The most recent GSV I'm seeing is from 10 years ago, prior to the installation of the milemarkers, including the 1.5. 

As Alps mentioned, one of the 0.5 mms went walking. The others may have walked as well.

This is still under NJDOTs jurisdiction, but they don't do much with it.

The imagery I'm referring to is from two months ago. It's on the slip road from US 322 east to US 130 south, which passes by the southern terminus of NJ 324. The road is almost exactly one and a half miles long, so the markers were visible from the slip road in the imagery before that.

[jeffandnicole]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea's dredging equipment or NJDOT didn't want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

The most recent GSV I'm seeing is from 10 years ago, prior to the installation of the milemarkers, including the 1.5. 

As Alps mentioned, one of the 0.5 mms went walking. The others may have walked as well.

This is still under NJDOTs jurisdiction, but they don't do much with it.

The imagery I'm referring to is from two months ago. It's on the slip road from US 322 east to US 130 south, which passes by the southern terminus of NJ 324. The road is almost exactly one and a half miles long, so the markers were visible from the slip road in the imagery before that.

Ah, ok.  You're referring to the interchange ramp from 322 East to 130 South.  From that, I can see one post where there's no longer a sign, and the other location where both the post and sign is missing completely. This portion of NJ 324 remains open for vehicular use.

For what it's worth, the section from 0.00 to 0.95 was dedesignated and vacated by state statute in 2018 and local ordinance in 2019: https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2016/S3556 and https://ecode360.com/LO0702/laws/LF1132426.pdf

[Alps]

Question for anyone in the loop with NJDOT: According to recent Google Street View imagery on a nearby slip road between US 322 and US 130, the mileposts at 1.5 on NJ 324 have been removed. When I inspected the closed section of the route in 2019, the mileposts at 0.5 had been removed. I always thought the ones at 0.5 came down either because they interfered with Atlantic Subsea's dredging equipment or NJDOT didn't want to encourage travel on the closed section. Has NJDOT downloaded NJ 324, do they plan to, or have they disavowed responsibility for it?

The most recent GSV I'm seeing is from 10 years ago, prior to the installation of the milemarkers, including the 1.5. 

As Alps mentioned, one of the 0.5 mms went walking. The others may have walked as well.

This is still under NJDOTs jurisdiction, but they don't do much with it.

The imagery I'm referring to is from two months ago. It's on the slip road from US 322 east to US 130 south, which passes by the southern terminus of NJ 324. The road is almost exactly one and a half miles long, so the markers were visible from the slip road in the imagery before that.

Ah, ok.  You're referring to the interchange ramp from 322 East to 130 South.  From that, I can see one post where there's no longer a sign, and the other location where both the post and sign is missing completely. This portion of NJ 324 remains open for vehicular use.

For what it's worth, the section from 0.00 to 0.95 was dedesignated and vacated by state statute in 2018 and local ordinance in 2019: https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2016/S3556 and https://ecode360.com/LO0702/laws/LF1132426.pdf

Now that is news to me. I'm glad I clinched it when it was open.

[FLAVORTOWN]

Noticed that NJ-18 near Neptune still has BGSes with Clearview font and some that looks like Arial. Was this a testing area in the past?

[D-Dey65]

I started checking out some Palisades Interstate Parkway scenes on Google Maps, and I spotted an electonic toll sign of some kind at the old toll booth:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8566152,-73.9618838,3a,15y,205.21h,83.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJRMA5hMRoI7dzGI9nT56AQ!2e0!5s20141001T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu
I know there used to be an older one of these which contained colored light bars for each fare, and had rates for vehicles that aren't allowed of the parkway in the 1970's.  I'm so sorry I've never found or taken a picture of those.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/XmdffNMmTAAihguL9
Interesting that they spelled out completely the entire George Washington Bridge name instead of using G. Washington Br. or Geo Washington Br. abbreviations.

[jeffandnicole]

https://goo.gl/maps/XmdffNMmTAAihguL9
Interesting that they spelled out completely the entire George Washington Bridge name instead of using G. Washington Br. or Geo Washington Br. abbreviations.

They've been doing the same with Delaware Memorial Bridge lately also.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/9MEEfAkCEdzJUJyL7
The same for the Parkway. No more GS Parkway on this assembly either.

[bzakharin]

https://goo.gl/maps/9MEEfAkCEdzJUJyL7
The same for the Parkway. No more GS Parkway on this assembly either.

I don't believe the old sign mentionedd the Parkway at all. However, if you're going to change something about how the Parkway is signed, add some control cities. It will be a lot more useful than spelling out "Garden State Parkway".

[roadman65]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

[Dough4872]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

[SignBridge]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

New York State certainly does use control cities/destinations on its toll roads such as the NY Thruway and the New England Thruway.

[roadman65]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

after the ticket machines yes.  However it was rare to see controls used before the turnpike entrance ramps.  Signs for Harrisburg and Pittsburgh later started to appear in the eighties.  Most side roads use the giant PA Turnpike shield at entrances with no cities.

[roadman65]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

New York State certainly does use control cities/destinations on its toll roads such as the NY Thruway and the New England Thruway.

In some places, but not always.  Perhaps western New York, but even in many places the I-87 or I-90 shields with Thruway in text was popular at Thruway entrances.

[vdeane]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

New York State certainly does use control cities/destinations on its toll roads such as the NY Thruway and the New England Thruway.

On the Thruway?  Yes.  On intersecting roads?  Not always.

[SignBridge]

NJ, PA, and NY were big on not using destinations for toll roads.  Don't know why, but that's how these three states were. Just use the text form of the toll road name as a control.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike uses control cities, with Ohio, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and New Jersey along the mainline (New York City is starting to replace New Jersey since the I-95 interchange was built) and Philadelphia, Allentown, and Scranton along the Northeast Extension.

New York State certainly does use control cities/destinations on its toll roads such as the NY Thruway and the New England Thruway.

On the Thruway?  Yes.  On intersecting roads?  Not always.

I stand corrected. LOL I was basing my observations on what I've seen in the downstate area.

[Alps]

To get back on topic, the Turnpike uses control cities now and the Parkway appears to be growing into it. So let's get back on topic.

[roadman65]

Yes, so it does seem more Parkway signs are getting control cities as sign replacements are happening.

What gets me is why the recent NJ 440 signs never included control cities on them. Even US 9 South should have included either Sayreville or South Amboy on the exit guides. Mainly, being both Route 440 and the Parkway meeting is a major junction, the use of at least " Shore Points"  could have been given for the Parkway Southbound, but wasn't.