New Jersey Turnpike

[SignBridge]

J&N, when I mentioned crossovers earlier, I just assumed they would be from the left lane of the outer-roadway, despite NJTA's wise policy of not allowing left-hand exits/entrances. Obviously crossovers involving overpasses to maintain the exit/entrances only on the right would be unreasonably expensive.

[jeffandnicole]

When toll rates were first established, I want to say that south of Exit 9 the rate was 1 cent per mile and north of 9 it was 3 cents per mile. Don't quote me on those exact rates, but whatever the rate was there was a higher price per mile up north vs. down south.

There is also an overall higher price going just one exit vs. going further than one exit.

Sometimes the rates don't make complete sense either, so there's that too.

[Alps]

When toll rates were first established, I want to say that south of Exit 9 the rate was 1 cent per mile and north of 9 it was 3 cents per mile. Don't quote me on those exact rates, but whatever the rate was there was a higher price per mile up north vs. down south.

There is also an overall higher price going just one exit vs. going further than one exit.

Sometimes the rates don't make complete sense either, so there's that too.

Add to that: There is a minimum rate you will pay for using the Turnpike. It may be up to 90 cents now.

[roadman65]

It always had a minimum rate.  Even in the 1970's it was 15 cents to go from Exit 11 to Exit 9 with the same price to go to Exit 10 (the I-287 exit).

Yes, north of Exit 9 the rate was always higher and my dad told me it was that real estate north of the Raritan River was more expensive especially when built through Downtown Elizabeth where many homes were knocked down to pave way for first the original 4 lane turnpike and then when it went from 6 to 12 (now 14) lanes wide.

[02 Park Ave]

A motorist getting off at Exit 10 would expect to pay different tolls depending upon whether they had gotten on the Turnpike at Exit 4, 7, or 7A.  Likewise for getting off at Exit 11.  However, one would expect that the difference between the tolls paid at these two exits for any two given entrance points would be the same.  In other words, as the difference in the tolls between Exit 4 and Exit 10 and between Exit 4 and Exit 11 is 35¢, I would expect the difference in the tolls between Exit 7 and Exit 10 and between Exit 7 and Exit 11 to be 35¢ also not 45¢.

Here is my question.  Why is there this difference?

[Alps]

A motorist getting off at Exit 10 would expect to pay different tolls depending upon whether they had gotten on the Turnpike at Exit 4, 7, or 7A.  Likewise for getting off at Exit 11.  However, one would expect that the difference between the tolls paid at these two exits for any two given entrance points would be the same.  In other words, as the difference in the tolls between Exit 4 and Exit 10 and between Exit 4 and Exit 11 is 35¢, I would expect the difference in the tolls between Exit 7 and Exit 10 and between Exit 7 and Exit 11 to be 35¢ also not 45¢.

Here is my question.  Why is there this difference?

My best answer is cumulative rounding errors over time as tolls increased.

[bluecountry]

How come on the NJTP heading south, Philadelphia is not used as the control city?
I feel that should be the control city, not Trenton.

[jeffandnicole]

How come on the NJTP heading south, Philadelphia is not used as the control city?
I feel that should be the control city, not Trenton.

See the current conversation going on here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11707.1925

[02 Park Ave]

There is a dearth of I-95 signs. If the road is to abandon its Turnpike identy and assume its proper I-95 identity this has to change and quickly.

[roadman65]

I lived in NJ from 1965 to 1990 and many living there already thought the whole length of the Turnpike was I-95 even south of Exit 10 (where I-95 used to end as the abandoned Somerset was supposed to tie into I-287 at Durham Ave. in S. Plainfield).

So identity is only an issue for signage.  However, from the Garden State Parkway, they have remedied that already. Exit 129 NB now features it and even local signs from CR 501 in Fords now has it and even US 9 NB has it despite the needed overhead sign where the ramp departs from the left near New Brunswick Avenue.

[jeffandnicole]

On the NJ Turnpike, at MP 51.1 which is in the middle of Interchange 6, "JCT North 95" signage has been added to the side of both the inner and outer roadways.  At MP 52.0, only on the outer roadway (for now?), "North 95/NJ TPK" reminder signage has been added, which I don't believe has ever been used on the Turnpike before.  They're large signs too for reminder signs...possibly 36" wide/tall.

[akotchi]

On the NJ Turnpike, at MP 51.1 which is in the middle of Interchange 6, "JCT North 95" signage has been added to the side of both the inner and outer roadways.  At MP 52.0, only on the outer roadway (for now?), "North 95/NJ TPK" reminder signage has been added, which I don't believe has ever been used on the Turnpike before.  They're large signs too for reminder signs...possibly 36" wide/tall.

There is also a JCT/95 assembly at MP 45.0 NB, just north of Exit 5.

[Roadsguy]

Has the NJTP ever had its shields used as reassurance markers before?

[jeffandnicole]

Has the NJTP ever had its shields used as reassurance markers before?

I never remember seeing any, unless they're someplace up north where I don't normally travel.

[PHLBOS]

Has the NJTP ever had its shields used as reassurance markers before?

I never remember seeing any, unless they're someplace up north where I don't normally travel.

Concur.  There has never been any NJTP shields posted as reassurance markers along the NJ Turnpike corridors (I'm including the I-78 branch as well) themselves.

[kevinb1994]

In what year did Sunoco take over the Turnpike service areas? It should be noted that Cities Service, now known as Citgo, was the original operator from the Turnpike's opening in November 1951, until the termination of its contract in March 1973, after which Exxon took over for five years until March 1978, when Arco (formerly owned by BP from 2000-2013 and Tesoro/Andeavor from 2013-2018, now owned by Marathon as of 10/1/18, making Marathon the largest petroleum refinery operator in the United States, with 16 refineries and over 3 million barrels per day of refining capacity, and this merger brings the SuperAmerica convenience stores back to Speedway), Amoco (a twenty-year subsidiary of BP since 1998), and Sunmark Industries took over operations.

[bzakharin]

Has the NJTP ever had its shields used as reassurance markers before?

I never remember seeing any, unless they're someplace up north where I don't normally travel.

Concur.  There has never been any NJTP shields posted as reassurance markers along the NJ Turnpike corridors (I'm including the I-78 branch as well) themselves.

Even the NJTP shields on pull-throughs are a recent development. They were first introduced around the time of the widening project (except the ones on the free section where they are paired with I-95 shields. Not sure when those appeared. Maybe when NJTA took ownership of that stretch of I-95). Before that, "THRU TRAFFIC" would be on the "pull-through" (are those all gone now?)

[PHLBOS]

Before that, "THRU TRAFFIC" would be on the "pull-through" (are those all gone now?)

For the older ones that last such sans any route/road shields: yes.
At present & based on relatively recent GSVs; the only pull-through signs that still have THRU TRAFFIC on them (with at least an NJTP shield) are the ones from the recent widening project (from 8A to 6).

[roadman65]

I see NB at Exit 13, there is no pull through destination.  Either its greened out or left out on purpose due to Exit 13 also serving NYC (as New York would indeed be that control city).
https://goo.gl/maps/g4a2krDnqzp

[PHLBOS]

I see NB at Exit 13, there is no pull through destination.  Either its greened out or left out on purpose due to Exit 13 also serving NYC (as New York would indeed be that control city).

Sadly, that's not the only northbound pull-through sign with that treatment. 

For some asinine reason, all of the newer MUTCD-style northbound pull-through signs as far south as Exit 9, do not list a control city/point/destination despite the related-ramp signage (at least up through Exit 11) listing either New York or New York City for the northbound Turnpike/I-95.

That said & IMHO, using NYC on northbound pull-through signage is appropriate up through Exit 12.  From Exit 13 (per your listed example) and northward; the use of either G.W. Bridge, Connecticut or even New England would be appropriate.  Using Fort Lee or New Haven, CT, while more MUTCD-compliant is a bit too obscure for this portion of the Turnpike.

[bzakharin]

I see NB at Exit 13, there is no pull through destination.  Either its greened out or left out on purpose due to Exit 13 also serving NYC (as New York would indeed be that control city).

Sadly, that's not the only northbound pull-through sign with that treatment. 

For some asinine reason, all of the newer MUTCD-style northbound pull-through signs as far south as Exit 9, do not list a control city/point/destination despite the related-ramp signage (at least up through Exit 11) listing either New York or New York City for the northbound Turnpike/I-95.

That said & IMHO, using NYC on northbound pull-through signage is appropriate up through Exit 12.  From Exit 13 (per your listed example) and northward; the use of either G.W. Bridge, Connecticut or even New England would be appropriate.  Using Fort Lee or New Haven, CT, while more MUTCD-compliant is a bit too obscure for this portion of the Turnpike.

You can't really ignore the fact that I-95 goes through New York. There are really no alternatives for the various New York-bound routes than to use bridges and tunnels, unless you want to start using boroughs or even neighborhoods of Manhattan. I know things like that are done within cities, but I don't think I've ever seen a neighborhood as a control point outside the city the neighborhood is in.

[PHLBOS]

I see NB at Exit 13, there is no pull through destination.  Either its greened out or left out on purpose due to Exit 13 also serving NYC (as New York would indeed be that control city).

Sadly, that's not the only northbound pull-through sign with that treatment. 

For some asinine reason, all of the newer MUTCD-style northbound pull-through signs as far south as Exit 9, do not list a control city/point/destination despite the related-ramp signage (at least up through Exit 11) listing either New York or New York City for the northbound Turnpike/I-95.

That said & IMHO, using NYC on northbound pull-through signage is appropriate up through Exit 12.  From Exit 13 (per your listed example) and northward; the use of either G.W. Bridge, Connecticut or even New England would be appropriate.  Using Fort Lee or New Haven, CT, while more MUTCD-compliant is a bit too obscure for this portion of the Turnpike.

You can't really ignore the fact that I-95 goes through New York.

We all know that I-95 goes through New York.  However, the portion of NYC that it goes through is not exactly the major core of the city (central & lower Manhattan).

There are really no alternatives for the various New York-bound routes than to use bridges and tunnels

Last time I checked, I-95 crosses into NYC from NJ via the George Washington Bridge.  The other bridges & tunnels south of the GWB connect closer/at Manhattan's/NYC's core.

... unless you want to start using boroughs or even neighborhoods of Manhattan.

Somehow a sign that reads 95 NORTH The Bronx, while accurate, wouldn't actually fly; especially since MUTCD now wants/prefers actual cities/towns to be used as listed control cities.  In the past, there were signs that listed Cross-Bronx Expressway but those signs were in NY and such were used in the same manner that the NJTP shield is being used on I-95 signage today (the expressway name was placed next to the route shield).

I know things like that are done within cities, but I don't think I've ever seen a neighborhood as a control point outside the city the neighborhood is in.

Chances are, those signs you saw are either older or local installs.

[jeffandnicole]

...I don't think I've ever seen a neighborhood as a control point outside the city the neighborhood is in.

Believe it or not, but based on what I think your commuting patterns are, you pass under one nearly everyday. The sign has since been replaced, but I think it's still on there:

https://goo.gl/maps/roexVXw1hfM2

Williamstown is within Monroe.

[BrianP]

... unless you want to start using boroughs or even neighborhoods of Manhattan.

Somehow a sign that reads 95 NORTH The Bronx, while accurate, wouldn't actually fly; especially since MUTCD now wants/prefers actual cities/towns to be used as listed control cities.  In the past, there were signs that listed Cross-Bronx Expressway but those signs were in NY and such were used in the same manner that the NJTP shield is being used on I-95 signage today (the expressway name was placed next to the route shield).

In general I'd agree with the MUTCD.  But in this case an exception should be made for huge cities.  You would take a much different route from the turnpike if going to Brooklyn vs the Bronx.  So signage should be able to differentiate that.  NYC is just too big to be one destination.  Using the borough names seems more than appropriate. 

[PHLBOS]

... unless you want to start using boroughs or even neighborhoods of Manhattan.

Somehow a sign that reads 95 NORTH The Bronx, while accurate, wouldn't actually fly; especially since MUTCD now wants/prefers actual cities/towns to be used as listed control cities.  In the past, there were signs that listed Cross-Bronx Expressway but those signs were in NY and such were used in the same manner that the NJTP shield is being used on I-95 signage today (the expressway name was placed next to the route shield).

In general I'd agree with the MUTCD.  But in this case an exception should be made for huge cities.  You would take a much different route from the turnpike if going to Brooklyn vs the Bronx.  So signage should be able to differentiate that.  NYC is just too big to be one destination.  Using the borough names seems more than appropriate.

It's worth noting that some previous-generation signage (not counting the old-school THRU TRAFFIC pull-through signage) along the northern portion of the NJ Turnpike (mainly north of where it splits in two) typically used George Washington Bridge, sometimes along with New England listed underneath, for the northbound direction.  Such IMHO was appropriate because it addressed both the local commuter as well as the long-distance traveler.

I do agree with you that MUTCD should allow some leeway regarding the usage of key points on major signage (for control destinations)... especially in major metropolitan areas/regions.  Not every part of the country is rural with the next major city some 50+ miles away.