New Jersey Turnpike

[J Route Z]

So no Nathan's in the new service areas? I always get those wedge French fries with the little red fork and all the toppings when I drive through New Jersey, I'm gonna miss that tradition.

Likewise. This made me hungry 

[Steve D]

The project to replace the first service area under the agreement the Turnpike Authority signed with HMS Host last year has begun.

ADVISORY: Thomas Edison Service Area on the New Jersey Turnpike to close for construction

The existing structure will be demolished and a new one built in its place under agreements announced last year with service area contractors HMS Host and Sunoco. The work is being done at no cost to taxpayers or toll payers.

Plans call for the new Thomas Edison facility to include Burger King, Chick-fil-A, Pret, Starbucks, Auntie Anne's, Z Mart, and a Sunoco convenience store.

Haven't seen any plans for the new area, but I'm assuming it will be similar to it's mate across the road, the Grover Cleveland Service Area.

Also interesting that they're tearing the whole structure down, rather than just gutting and renovating it. All of the service areas on the Turnpike were rebuilt in the late 90s/early 2000s, so I would assume the structure itself would still be in good shape. They had to tear down the Grover Cleveland one due to the damage it sustained from Hurricane Sandy, but Edison did OK.

All of the service areas were renovated in the early 1990s, not re-built.  The buildings are still the originals from the 1950s, minus Grover Cleveland as you mention which was damaged and then rebuilt.

The new contract will replace most (but not all) of the service areas: Vince Lombardi, Thomas Edison, Joyce Kilmer, Walt Whitman, Clara Barton, and John Fenwick, with newly built-from-scratch buildings, similar to Grover Cleveland, due to a new contract that will not cost the taxpayers any money.  These include some of the oldest ones on the turnpike.

[02 Park Ave]

Does the NJTA have any schedule for repainting lane markings on entrance and exit ramps?  Exits 7 and 7A are particularly bad.  The markings are almost nonexistent at some critical locations.

[jeffandnicole]

Buried deep in the NJTA meeting minutes for last month: The Turnpike & Parkway will continue allowing motorists an additional 10% discount for 'green' vehicles that get at least 45 mpg.  The agreement calls for an extension of the current program thru November, 2023.  The program is tag specific, and they'll provide you with a green tag for the program.  The trips must be taken off-peak, and the discount is taken on top of the existing off-peak rate.

I'm very sure that most people that are eligible for this have no idea the plan exists.

https://www.njta.com/media/4026/bm-min_2018-8-21.pdf; starts on PDF page 32.  PDF Page 41 shows the total amount the NJTA "lost" as a result of the discount.  For an entire year on both highways, it totaled just $57,708, averaging out to $158 per day on both roadways in total

[storm2k]

Buried deep in the NJTA meeting minutes for last month: The Turnpike & Parkway will continue allowing motorists an additional 10% discount for 'green' vehicles that get at least 45 mpg.  The agreement calls for an extension of the current program thru November, 2023.  The program is tag specific, and they'll provide you with a green tag for the program.  The trips must be taken off-peak, and the discount is taken on top of the existing off-peak rate.

I'm very sure that most people that are eligible for this have no idea the plan exists.

https://www.njta.com/media/4026/bm-min_2018-8-21.pdf; starts on PDF page 32.  PDF Page 41 shows the total amount the NJTA "lost" as a result of the discount.  For an entire year on both highways, it totaled just $57,708, averaging out to $158 per day on both roadways in total

It's not well advertised. If I was driving a hybrid, I'd want to get into this program. Being in it also allows you to travel in the HOV lane between 11 and 14 without meeting the occupancy requirements when it's in effect, although with how little the NJ State Police actually enforce the lane, it's almost moot.

[MikeCL]

I was on the turnpike today what are those signs talking about use the national highway? I caught it at the last second so I don't know

[D-Dey65]

The project to replace the first service area under the agreement the Turnpike Authority signed with HMS Host last year has begun.

ADVISORY: Thomas Edison Service Area on the New Jersey Turnpike to close for construction

The existing structure will be demolished and a new one built in its place under agreements announced last year with service area contractors HMS Host and Sunoco. The work is being done at no cost to taxpayers or toll payers.

Plans call for the new Thomas Edison facility to include Burger King, Chick-fil-A, Pret, Starbucks, Auntie Anne's, Z Mart, and a Sunoco convenience store.

Haven't seen any plans for the new area, but I'm assuming it will be similar to it's mate across the road, the Grover Cleveland Service Area.

Are these going to to be one of the few Sunoco convenince stores that won't be owned by 7-Eleven?


Also, I really hope they're not going to get rid of the garages like they did in Delaware and Maryland.

[02 Park Ave]

Buried deep in the NJTA meeting minutes for last month: The Turnpike & Parkway will continue allowing motorists an additional 10% discount for 'green' vehicles that get at least 45 mpg.  The agreement calls for an extension of the current program thru November, 2023.  The program is tag specific, and they'll provide you with a green tag for the program.  The trips must be taken off-peak, and the discount is taken on top of the existing off-peak rate.

I'm very sure that most people that are eligible for this have no idea the plan exists.

https://www.njta.com/media/4026/bm-min_2018-8-21.pdf; starts on PDF page 32.  PDF Page 41 shows the total amount the NJTA "lost" as a result of the discount.  For an entire year on both highways, it totaled just $57,708, averaging out to $158 per day on both roadways in total

The kicker on this plan is the NJTA's definition of "peak".  It is not only rush hours but also weekends.  I think that very few people could benefit from the plan.

Also, the way NJ EZPass works, you can only sign up for one discount plan.  Even if I was eligible for this plan I think that the DRPA senior rate plan would be more bneficial.

Finally, what is a "green tag"?

[storm2k]

Buried deep in the NJTA meeting minutes for last month: The Turnpike & Parkway will continue allowing motorists an additional 10% discount for 'green' vehicles that get at least 45 mpg.  The agreement calls for an extension of the current program thru November, 2023.  The program is tag specific, and they'll provide you with a green tag for the program.  The trips must be taken off-peak, and the discount is taken on top of the existing off-peak rate.

I'm very sure that most people that are eligible for this have no idea the plan exists.

https://www.njta.com/media/4026/bm-min_2018-8-21.pdf; starts on PDF page 32.  PDF Page 41 shows the total amount the NJTA "lost" as a result of the discount.  For an entire year on both highways, it totaled just $57,708, averaging out to $158 per day on both roadways in total

The kicker on this plan is the NJTA's definition of "peak".  It is not only rush hours but also weekends.  I think that very few people could benefit from the plan.

Also, the way NJ EZPass works, you can only sign up for one discount plan.  Even if I was eligible for this plan I think that the DRPA senior rate plan would be more bneficial.

Finally, what is a "green tag"?

Exactly what it sounds like, a special green tag that they give to hybrids.

[storm2k]

So I was driving back from checking out the new PA Turnpike/95 ramps yesterday, and I remembered something. Right around when the NJTA started the 6-9 dualization, when they had first moved the split north of 8A to accommodate construction, there were some new signs that went up that basically were the full color VMS's set on standard NJTA gantries with standard green panels surrounding them. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't this supposed to be some sort of crossover option between the inner and outer roadways going northbound? So if they had to close one of the roadways for a crash, roadwork, etc., they could route traffic along better and not have to have the entire roadway closed from one end to the other? Does anyone know what happened to these plans?

[jeffandnicole]

So I was driving back from checking out the new PA Turnpike/95 ramps yesterday, and I remembered something. Right around when the NJTA started the 6-9 dualization, when they had first moved the split north of 8A to accommodate construction, there were some new signs that went up that basically were the full color VMS's set on standard NJTA gantries with standard green panels surrounding them. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't this supposed to be some sort of crossover option between the inner and outer roadways going northbound? So if they had to close one of the roadways for a crash, roadwork, etc., they could route traffic along better and not have to have the entire roadway closed from one end to the other? Does anyone know what happened to these plans?

There was a temporary diverge in that area during construction, but there's never been a permanent crossover option midway.

Personally, there should be, especially considering the length of the dual-dual roadways now.  The only legal way to do it is by going thru a service plaza; an option the Turnpike doesn't acknowledge for safety reasons.

[storm2k]

So I was driving back from checking out the new PA Turnpike/95 ramps yesterday, and I remembered something. Right around when the NJTA started the 6-9 dualization, when they had first moved the split north of 8A to accommodate construction, there were some new signs that went up that basically were the full color VMS's set on standard NJTA gantries with standard green panels surrounding them. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't this supposed to be some sort of crossover option between the inner and outer roadways going northbound? So if they had to close one of the roadways for a crash, roadwork, etc., they could route traffic along better and not have to have the entire roadway closed from one end to the other? Does anyone know what happened to these plans?

There was a temporary diverge in that area during construction, but there's never been a permanent crossover option midway.

Personally, there should be, especially considering the length of the dual-dual roadways now.  The only legal way to do it is by going thru a service plaza; an option the Turnpike doesn't acknowledge for safety reasons.

I really thought I remember reading that they were planning a crossover option to make things more flexible for traffic control operations.

[jeffandnicole]

So I was driving back from checking out the new PA Turnpike/95 ramps yesterday, and I remembered something. Right around when the NJTA started the 6-9 dualization, when they had first moved the split north of 8A to accommodate construction, there were some new signs that went up that basically were the full color VMS's set on standard NJTA gantries with standard green panels surrounding them. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't this supposed to be some sort of crossover option between the inner and outer roadways going northbound? So if they had to close one of the roadways for a crash, roadwork, etc., they could route traffic along better and not have to have the entire roadway closed from one end to the other? Does anyone know what happened to these plans?

There was a temporary diverge in that area during construction, but there's never been a permanent crossover option midway.

Personally, there should be, especially considering the length of the dual-dual roadways now.  The only legal way to do it is by going thru a service plaza; an option the Turnpike doesn't acknowledge for safety reasons.

I really thought I remember reading that they were planning a crossover option to make things more flexible for traffic control operations.

I certainly know the idea was brought up here, and may have been presented to or considered by NJTA at some point during their planning.  But I don't think it ever got serious consideration.

[Alps]

So I was driving back from checking out the new PA Turnpike/95 ramps yesterday, and I remembered something. Right around when the NJTA started the 6-9 dualization, when they had first moved the split north of 8A to accommodate construction, there were some new signs that went up that basically were the full color VMS's set on standard NJTA gantries with standard green panels surrounding them. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't this supposed to be some sort of crossover option between the inner and outer roadways going northbound? So if they had to close one of the roadways for a crash, roadwork, etc., they could route traffic along better and not have to have the entire roadway closed from one end to the other? Does anyone know what happened to these plans?

There was a temporary diverge in that area during construction, but there's never been a permanent crossover option midway.

Personally, there should be, especially considering the length of the dual-dual roadways now.  The only legal way to do it is by going thru a service plaza; an option the Turnpike doesn't acknowledge for safety reasons.

I really thought I remember reading that they were planning a crossover option to make things more flexible for traffic control operations.

They were looking into it but nothing has been put into design at this time.

[SignBridge]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

[J Route Z]

Does anyone plan on taking pictures of turnpike signs north of exit 6 indicating the I-95 shields revealed, since the PA Turnpike interchange project completion?

[02 Park Ave]

Does anyone plan on taking pictures of turnpike signs north of exit 6 indicating the I-95 shields revealed, since the PA Turnpike interchange project completion?

I drove through there Sunday night and did not see any.

I do not think that the NJTA is that enthusiastic about embracing their I-95 identity as is the PTC.  Has anything even been announced about renumbering of exits on their portion of I-95?

[storm2k]

Does anyone plan on taking pictures of turnpike signs north of exit 6 indicating the I-95 shields revealed, since the PA Turnpike interchange project completion?

I drove through there Sunday night and did not see any.

I do not think that the NJTA is that enthusiastic about embracing their I-95 identity as is the PTC.  Has anything even been announced about renumbering of exits on their portion of I-95?

Won't happen so long as the ticket system exists, I think. Even if it did, it would start with the southern end of the Turnpike at the Delaware Memorial Bridge, not at Exit 6.

[Alps]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

I would say it's more a matter of priority. Crossovers cost a lot of money however you build them. Bridges need to be replaced in the next few years. Big ones.

[PHLBOS]

Does anyone plan on taking pictures of turnpike signs north of exit 6 indicating the I-95 shields revealed, since the PA Turnpike interchange project completion?

See pages 75 & 77 of this thread for pics of the southbound outer/truck lane corridor.

[storm2k]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

I would say it's more a matter of priority. Crossovers cost a lot of money however you build them. Bridges need to be replaced in the next few years. Big ones.

Which is why I'm surprised that they didn't try to get one built in as part of the expansion project when they had the money for it.

[jeffandnicole]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

I would say it's more a matter of priority. Crossovers cost a lot of money however you build them. Bridges need to be replaced in the next few years. Big ones.

Which is why I'm surprised that they didn't try to get one built in as part of the expansion project when they had the money for it.

Although, money went elsewhere to complete other projects, as well as additional work in the 6-9 area that wasn't originally planned for the project.  They took out the PA Turnpike extension to the NJ Turnpike Inner Roadway ramp at Interchange 6 to save some money as well. 

A "cheap" option would've been to do a crossover without mandatory right lane access (in other words, the outer roadway's access point would be from/to the left lane).  This option may have been considered if the crossover would only be utilized for emergencies (ie: closures due to accidents/incidents/construction which require a many-hour roadway closure).  A crossover fully to/from the right lane would be much more costly, but could be used for all traffic at any time.

[storm2k]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

I would say it's more a matter of priority. Crossovers cost a lot of money however you build them. Bridges need to be replaced in the next few years. Big ones.

Which is why I'm surprised that they didn't try to get one built in as part of the expansion project when they had the money for it.

Although, money went elsewhere to complete other projects, as well as additional work in the 6-9 area that wasn't originally planned for the project.  They took out the PA Turnpike extension to the NJ Turnpike Inner Roadway ramp at Interchange 6 to save some money as well. 

A "cheap" option would've been to do a crossover without mandatory right lane access (in other words, the outer roadway's access point would be from/to the left lane).  This option may have been considered if the crossover would only be utilized for emergencies (ie: closures due to accidents/incidents/construction which require a many-hour roadway closure).  A crossover fully to/from the right lane would be much more costly, but could be used for all traffic at any time.

Which ramp to the inner roadway? There are ramps to both roadways heading northbound. It made no sense to have one southbound as the dual roadways end just beyond the exit. Unless there was a strong push for further dualization further down the Turnpike (and I don't see how traffic numbers would come close to showing a need for it), it would have been a waste to have a second ramp to the southbound main roadway.

[jeffandnicole]

I'm surprised NJTA doesn't want those crossovers. You'd think they'd want that flexibility in traffic movement. NJDOT has them in some places with dual roadways. I know of one on I-80 just east of the Garden State Parkway.

I would say it's more a matter of priority. Crossovers cost a lot of money however you build them. Bridges need to be replaced in the next few years. Big ones.

Which is why I'm surprised that they didn't try to get one built in as part of the expansion project when they had the money for it.

Although, money went elsewhere to complete other projects, as well as additional work in the 6-9 area that wasn't originally planned for the project.  They took out the PA Turnpike extension to the NJ Turnpike Inner Roadway ramp at Interchange 6 to save some money as well. 

A "cheap" option would've been to do a crossover without mandatory right lane access (in other words, the outer roadway's access point would be from/to the left lane).  This option may have been considered if the crossover would only be utilized for emergencies (ie: closures due to accidents/incidents/construction which require a many-hour roadway closure).  A crossover fully to/from the right lane would be much more costly, but could be used for all traffic at any time.

Which ramp to the inner roadway? There are ramps to both roadways heading northbound. It made no sense to have one southbound as the dual roadways end just beyond the exit. Unless there was a strong push for further dualization further down the Turnpike (and I don't see how traffic numbers would come close to showing a need for it), it would have been a waste to have a second ramp to the southbound main roadway.

I'm referring to the Southbound direction, and the ramp was indeed included in many plans until it was removed.  Was it a waste?  Yeah.  But still that ramp was included in budgets and such until it was decided to be removed.

[02 Park Ave]

Just how are the toll rates established on the Turnpike?  I did an analysis of six potential journeys using the peak tolls.  They involved getting on at either Exit 4, 7, or 7A and getting off at either Exit 10 or 11.  The ∆ for exiting at Exit 11 vs. Exit 10 from Exit 4 is 35¢, from Exit 7 it is 45¢, and from Exit 7A it is 30¢.

Why is there a disparity like this for traveling the same 3 mile distance (i.e. between Exits 10 and 11) when one gets on at different entrances?

By the way, the toll between Exits 10 and 11 is 90¢.