New Jersey Turnpike

[roadman65]

Wilmington is like Benson in NC or Lake City in FL.

Yeah, they're bad choices for control city.

I don't think Wilmington is bad; Trenton is.
Wilmington is directly adjacent to 95, and moreover, it is a major crossroads merging with 95 and as well beach traffic down to Norfolk.

I don't think of the 295-95 junction as being in Wilmington though (even if it technically may be)... when I think of reaching Wilmington from the southbound Turnpike it involves going north on I-95 or I-495, when most traffic from southbound Turnpike probably goes to southbound I-95.

It's the largest entity near that junction and being the bridge isn't used anymore, it seems fit. I-295 don't have to go through it properly to warrant it as much as I-70 east of Frederick gets Baltimore even though the interstate ends short of it.

[ran4sh]

... because that is an example of continuing in the same direction, as opposed to changing direction.

[roadman65]

... because that is an example of continuing in the same direction, as opposed to changing direction.

Doesn't matter. It's close enough to the junction to pass to warrant its use.  Cities of the size of Wilmington, although smaller than Trenton, still have a metro area. The big junction of I-295 and I-95 is in that metro. So it fits.

[bluecountry]

Any reason why the NJTP NB divides into 3+3 just before exit 6, and SB the divide ends just after?

Usually the road would continue as 3 lanes then when the PATP/95 enters at exit 6 it would become 3+3.

[roadman65]

Any reason why the NJTP NB divides into 3+3 just before exit 6, and SB the divide ends just after?

Usually the road would continue as 3 lanes then when the PATP/95 enters at exit 6 it would become 3+3.

Good question.

[davewiecking]

Any reason why the NJTP NB divides into 3+3 just before exit 6, and SB the divide ends just after?

Usually the road would continue as 3 lanes then when the PATP/95 enters at exit 6 it would become 3+3.

Possibly because, assuming the southern section would eventually be widened, they only wanted to reengineer the interchange once to add the extra ramps in both directions.

[jeffandnicole]

Any reason why the NJTP NB divides into 3+3 just before exit 6, and SB the divide ends just after?

Usually the road would continue as 3 lanes then when the PATP/95 enters at exit 6 it would become 3+3.

This question came up during their public study period.  While no longer linked on the NJ Turnpike's website, a Google Search will find documents relating to the widening at www.njturnpikewidening.com .  On Page 12 of http://www.njturnpikewidening.com/documents/Interchange6-9WideningProgramExecutiveOrderNo.172-PublicHearingReport.pdf (and possibly other places), they referenced why they designed the merge south of Interchange 6: They performed comprehensive analyses of alternative configurations, and this design was considered to provide the best operation and safety.

I remember being at a public hearing and asking someone about this also.  They stated their analysis showed it was better to allow traffic to continue thru the interchange, and do the merging at a separate location.  If done at the interchange, especially on the SB side, "Exit Only" lanes would need to be built, and they often have a tendency for traffic to merge in or out of them at the last moment. 

I also recall it being mentioned that their analysis showed that only 5 lanes would be needed between Interchanges 6 & 7A, but after their experiences with 5 lanes between Interchanges 8A & 9, they decided to build 6 lanes throughout, which will significantly assist traffic when either the inner or outer roadway is closed.

The widening south of Interchange 6 is probably an unusual case in NJ where a highway was widened well beyond what was needed for traffic, but to accommodate a smooth merging process, they built it the way we see it.

It was interesting to note that the subject of 4 laning the Turnpike between Interchanges 5 & 6 did come up, which you have referenced often, but the Turnpike didn't deem it necessary.  See Pages 34 - 35.  It noted that their analysis expected the merge Southbound would start congesting in 2023. We're here in 2023, and that does not appear to be occurring.

[NJRoadfan]

On the topic of skip line length.... it seems that the Turnpike might be doing away with the extra long lines. The northbound side from Exit 4 to around Exit 5 was recently repaved and has standard length lines painted.

[roadman65]

One always got me was the former split at Exit 9 when the dual carriageways were first built and prior to the 8A and 9 extension. The NB split had two redundant ramps depart after the split, but the former SB Exit 14 ramp in Newark would diverge from the outer roadway with no access from the inner.

The Exit 9 NB ramps were immediately after the split, but the original SB Exit 14 ramp was about a mile after the split and it could have used the inner roadway own ramp for it.

Also why was Exit 14 SB moved to its current location on both spurs with the long cattle chute into I-78?  Was there back ups at the 14 plaza that caused congestion on the SB outer roadway?

Why also does WB Newark Bay Extension sign both US 1-9 and the Airport to exit the freeway to merge into the the NB Exit 14 ramp to loop around under I-95 into the SB Exit 14 ramp?

[Mergingtraffic]

On the topic of skip line length.... it seems that the Turnpike might be doing away with the extra long lines. The northbound side from Exit 4 to around Exit 5 was recently repaved and has standard length lines painted.

Hopefully, just temp lines until the final lines come through?

[jeffandnicole]

On the topic of skip line length.... it seems that the Turnpike might be doing away with the extra long lines. The northbound side from Exit 4 to around Exit 5 was recently repaved and has standard length lines painted.

Hopefully, just temp lines until the final lines come through?

Not likely.  They used standard length lines on a recent repaving project between Interchanges 2 & 3 as well.  The standard line length plus gap wouldn't match up with a NJ Turnpike traditional long line and gap. 

[lstone19]

One always got me was the former split at Exit 9 when the dual carriageways were first built and prior to the 8A and 9 extension. The NB split had two redundant ramps depart after the split, but the former SB Exit 14 ramp in Newark would diverge from the outer roadway with no access from the inner.

The Exit 9 NB ramps were immediately after the split, but the original SB Exit 14 ramp was about a mile after the split and it could have used the inner roadway own ramp for it.

Also why was Exit 14 SB moved to its current location on both spurs with the long cattle chute into I-78?  Was there back ups at the 14 plaza that caused congestion on the SB outer roadway?

The original dual-dual was only to Exit 10. Extending them to Exit 9 was the first extension. I rarely was on the Turnpike south of Exit 14 but looking at historicaerials.com, it looks like as built, the original Exit 10 configuration mirrored Exit 14 with access to/from only the outer lanes (1969 aerial). In the 1972 aerial, the additional ramps are under construction along with the dual-dual extension to Exit 9.

I think the current arrangement at 14 southbound gets the 14 traffic on their own roadway before the eastern and western alignments do their dance to become the inner and outer roadways.  I don't recall any big backups (not on it all that much) so I suspect the reason for it was simply to reduce volume at the split and merge of the through traffic and avoid some weaving. Same northbound in reverse (14 entry traffic merges after the inner and outer split and merge to become the eastern and western roadways).

[roadman65]

One always got me was the former split at Exit 9 when the dual carriageways were first built and prior to the 8A and 9 extension. The NB split had two redundant ramps depart after the split, but the former SB Exit 14 ramp in Newark would diverge from the outer roadway with no access from the inner.

The Exit 9 NB ramps were immediately after the split, but the original SB Exit 14 ramp was about a mile after the split and it could have used the inner roadway own ramp for it.

Also why was Exit 14 SB moved to its current location on both spurs with the long cattle chute into I-78?  Was there back ups at the 14 plaza that caused congestion on the SB outer roadway?

The original dual-dual was only to Exit 10. Extending them to Exit 9 was the first extension. I rarely was on the Turnpike south of Exit 14 but looking at historicaerials.com, it looks like as built, the original Exit 10 configuration mirrored Exit 14 with access to/from only the outer lanes (1969 aerial). In the 1972 aerial, the additional ramps are under construction along with the dual-dual extension to Exit 9.

I think the current arrangement at 14 southbound gets the 14 traffic on their own roadway before the eastern and western alignments do their dance to become the inner and outer roadways.  I don't recall any big backups (not on it all that much) so I suspect the reason for it was simply to reduce volume at the split and merge of the through traffic and avoid some weaving. Same northbound in reverse (14 entry traffic merges after the inner and outer split and merge to become the eastern and western roadways).

Looks like they’re replacing the signs on the NB 14 ramp.

Anyway didn’t realize that getting on NB from I-78 led you into a cattlechute.  Surprised, though to see both spurs signed as I-95 from the long ramp.

https://goo.gl/maps/5MuF1LFeT3TDnWBV7
Yet on the 15 E ramp I-95 is signed only for the Western Spur.

Also why isn’t Trenton on a flip panel? The GWB is on such, but Trenton gets 21st Century technology.

[lstone19]

One always got me was the former split at Exit 9 when the dual carriageways were first built and prior to the 8A and 9 extension. The NB split had two redundant ramps depart after the split, but the former SB Exit 14 ramp in Newark would diverge from the outer roadway with no access from the inner.

The Exit 9 NB ramps were immediately after the split, but the original SB Exit 14 ramp was about a mile after the split and it could have used the inner roadway own ramp for it.

Also why was Exit 14 SB moved to its current location on both spurs with the long cattle chute into I-78?  Was there back ups at the 14 plaza that caused congestion on the SB outer roadway?

The original dual-dual was only to Exit 10. Extending them to Exit 9 was the first extension. I rarely was on the Turnpike south of Exit 14 but looking at historicaerials.com, it looks like as built, the original Exit 10 configuration mirrored Exit 14 with access to/from only the outer lanes (1969 aerial). In the 1972 aerial, the additional ramps are under construction along with the dual-dual extension to Exit 9.

I think the current arrangement at 14 southbound gets the 14 traffic on their own roadway before the eastern and western alignments do their dance to become the inner and outer roadways.  I don't recall any big backups (not on it all that much) so I suspect the reason for it was simply to reduce volume at the split and merge of the through traffic and avoid some weaving. Same northbound in reverse (14 entry traffic merges after the inner and outer split and merge to become the eastern and western roadways).

Anyway didn't realize that getting on NB from I-78 led you into a cattlechute.

Your "cattlechute" is an additional three-lane roadway each way. Hard to call that a cattle chute. The Turnpike is essentially a dual-triple for that mile. It's been a long time since I've been there but I think it's a very good way to avoid what would otherwise be a major weaving area. I think many of the things the NJ Turnpike has done that people question are actually well thought out ways of avoiding weaves and keeping major flows separated (I've said it before but the arrangenent at the north end and preferring the western alignment for GWB traffic keeps I-95 traffic to/from the GWB completely separate from the I-80 to/from the Lincoln Tunnel traffic in the area from the Lombardi service area to I-80).

[jeffandnicole]

One always got me was the former split at Exit 9 when the dual carriageways were first built and prior to the 8A and 9 extension. The NB split had two redundant ramps depart after the split, but the former SB Exit 14 ramp in Newark would diverge from the outer roadway with no access from the inner.

The Exit 9 NB ramps were immediately after the split, but the original SB Exit 14 ramp was about a mile after the split and it could have used the inner roadway own ramp for it.

Also why was Exit 14 SB moved to its current location on both spurs with the long cattle chute into I-78?  Was there back ups at the 14 plaza that caused congestion on the SB outer roadway?

The original dual-dual was only to Exit 10. Extending them to Exit 9 was the first extension. I rarely was on the Turnpike south of Exit 14 but looking at historicaerials.com, it looks like as built, the original Exit 10 configuration mirrored Exit 14 with access to/from only the outer lanes (1969 aerial). In the 1972 aerial, the additional ramps are under construction along with the dual-dual extension to Exit 9.

I think the current arrangement at 14 southbound gets the 14 traffic on their own roadway before the eastern and western alignments do their dance to become the inner and outer roadways.  I don't recall any big backups (not on it all that much) so I suspect the reason for it was simply to reduce volume at the split and merge of the through traffic and avoid some weaving. Same northbound in reverse (14 entry traffic merges after the inner and outer split and merge to become the eastern and western roadways).

Anyway didn't realize that getting on NB from I-78 led you into a cattlechute.

Your "cattlechute" is an additional three-lane roadway each way. Hard to call that a cattle chute. The Turnpike is essentially a dual-triple for that mile. It's been a long time since I've been there but I think it's a very good way to avoid what would otherwise be a major weaving area. I think many of the things the NJ Turnpike has done that people question are actually well thought out ways of avoiding weaves and keeping major flows separated (I've said it before but the arrangenent at the north end and preferring the western alignment for GWB traffic keeps I-95 traffic to/from the GWB completely separate from the I-80 to/from the Lincoln Tunnel traffic in the area from the Lombardi service area to I-80).

Agreed.  A cattleshute is normally a single lane, 10-12 feet wide, with jersey barriers on both sides.  This is a normal ramp, with full shoulder to boot.

The ramp hybrid VMSs are all typically built the same way: Routes up top, flip panel, then VMS screen.  It looks a bit odd this way how they designed it, but the basic sign structure is how they've designed all their hybrids signs.

[roadman65]

Whatever, it's a long ramp indeed.

Yes I now understand the logic of it as I-287 in Bridgewater has a similar set up from US 202/206 ( Exit 17) and I-78. There are dual carriageways to separate traffic heading from Edison, Piscataway, Somerset, and Bound Brook to points west on I-78 from traffic entering I-287 from US 202/206 to Morristown and points north including I-78 East to avoid weaving and creating four lanes ( now 6) of multi lanes. Ditto SB as I-78 WB to I-287 SB merges to a different carriageway than I-78 EB to I-287 SB as the former is mostly going to Somerville and Bridgewater while the latter is heading to points south along I-287 from Bound Brook to Staten Island. The two carriageways merge after US 202/206 when the I-78 WB traffic distributes themselves to Routes 202 & 206.

[lstone19]

Whatever, it's a long ramp indeed.

Yes I now understand the logic of it as I-287 in Bridgewater has a similar set up from US 202/206 ( Exit 17) and I-78. There are dual carriageways to separate traffic heading from Edison, Piscataway, Somerset, and Bound Brook to points west on I-78 from traffic entering I-287 from US 202/206 to Morristown and points north including I-78 East to avoid weaving and creating four lanes ( now 6) of multi lanes. Ditto SB as I-78 WB to I-287 SB merges to a different carriageway than I-78 EB to I-287 SB as the former is mostly going to Somerville and Bridgewater while the latter is heading to points south along I-287 from Bound Brook to Staten Island. The two carriageways merge after US 202/206 when the I-78 WB traffic distributes themselves to Routes 202 & 206.

Yep. I forgot about that despite growing up near I-78 about 10 miles east of there (Berkeley Heights) during all the years when "Local Traffic Only" was the control city for an unsigned I-78 East at I-287 ("Local Traffic Only" should mean that if you aren't positive you're the local traffic they mean, you aren't). My opinion is other states would have been well-served to look at what NJDOT and the Turnpike have done for complex areas like those two. Having just ended 25 years living in the Chicago area, there are so many places ISTHA could have improved if they had stolen some ideas from NJ (the I-88/I-355 interchange in particular based - the section where the two run parallel should have been a dual-dual configuration (one route outside the other) with high-speed ramps for the moves between the two roads much like how the Turnpike goes from the dual-dual to the east/west alignments with all moves equally favored).

[roadman65]

Whatever, it's a long ramp indeed.

Yes I now understand the logic of it as I-287 in Bridgewater has a similar set up from US 202/206 ( Exit 17) and I-78. There are dual carriageways to separate traffic heading from Edison, Piscataway, Somerset, and Bound Brook to points west on I-78 from traffic entering I-287 from US 202/206 to Morristown and points north including I-78 East to avoid weaving and creating four lanes ( now 6) of multi lanes. Ditto SB as I-78 WB to I-287 SB merges to a different carriageway than I-78 EB to I-287 SB as the former is mostly going to Somerville and Bridgewater while the latter is heading to points south along I-287 from Bound Brook to Staten Island. The two carriageways merge after US 202/206 when the I-78 WB traffic distributes themselves to Routes 202 & 206.

Yep. I forgot about that despite growing up near I-78 about 10 miles east of there (Berkeley Heights) during all the years when "Local Traffic Only" was the control city for an unsigned I-78 East at I-287 ("Local Traffic Only" should mean that if you aren't positive you're the local traffic they mean, you aren't). My opinion is other states would have been well-served to look at what NJDOT and the Turnpike have done for complex areas like those two. Having just ended 25 years living in the Chicago area, there are so many places ISTHA could have improved if they had stolen some ideas from NJ (the I-88/I-355 interchange in particular based - the section where the two run parallel should have been a dual-dual configuration (one route outside the other) with high-speed ramps for the moves between the two roads much like how the Turnpike goes from the dual-dual to the east/west alignments with all moves equally favored).

Georgia did for I-85 and I-285 near ATL and Minneapolis for I-35W and I-94. CT also at both I-91 and CT 15 interchanges.

[bluecountry]

Any reason why the NJTP NB divides into 3+3 just before exit 6, and SB the divide ends just after?

Usually the road would continue as 3 lanes then when the PATP/95 enters at exit 6 it would become 3+3.

This question came up during their public study period.  While no longer linked on the NJ Turnpike's website, a Google Search will find documents relating to the widening at www.njturnpikewidening.com .  On Page 12 of http://www.njturnpikewidening.com/documents/Interchange6-9WideningProgramExecutiveOrderNo.172-PublicHearingReport.pdf (and possibly other places), they referenced why they designed the merge south of Interchange 6: They performed comprehensive analyses of alternative configurations, and this design was considered to provide the best operation and safety.

I remember being at a public hearing and asking someone about this also.  They stated their analysis showed it was better to allow traffic to continue thru the interchange, and do the merging at a separate location.  If done at the interchange, especially on the SB side, "Exit Only" lanes would need to be built, and they often have a tendency for traffic to merge in or out of them at the last moment. 

I also recall it being mentioned that their analysis showed that only 5 lanes would be needed between Interchanges 6 & 7A, but after their experiences with 5 lanes between Interchanges 8A & 9, they decided to build 6 lanes throughout, which will significantly assist traffic when either the inner or outer roadway is closed.

The widening south of Interchange 6 is probably an unusual case in NJ where a highway was widened well beyond what was needed for traffic, but to accommodate a smooth merging process, they built it the way we see it.

It was interesting to note that the subject of 4 laning the Turnpike between Interchanges 5 & 6 did come up, which you have referenced often, but the Turnpike didn't deem it necessary.  See Pages 34 - 35.  It noted that their analysis expected the merge Southbound would start congesting in 2023. We're here in 2023, and that does not appear to be occurring.

SB I understand, have the PATP traffic exit first, then merge from 6 to 3.
NB is what I do not understand. 
  Why have the road become 3+3, and then have both the inner and outer 3's have exit 6?
  Wouldn't it have made more sense to continue NB with 3 lanes, adding one aux for exit 6 (which very few people from SB use) then have the 3 lanes split to 2+2 adding the 3rd lane with the PATP merge?

Also, I LOVE how it is 3+3 from exit 6 onward, because that part you can FLY!

One more thing, I long have said the NJTP should be 4 lanes from exit 6 to exit 4, then 3 lanes to exit 3, and then 2 lanes after through the rural part.

[ran4sh]

"Why have the road become 3+3, and then have both the inner and outer 3's have exit 6?"

1: Future-proofing - if the dual dual section is extended southward, no additional road work is needed for the northbound exits.
2: Operational considerations - the whole point of fully separate roadways is that, when necessary, one of them can be closed with the other one handling all the traffic. If the car only roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6. If the outer car+truck roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6.

[roadman65]

"Why have the road become 3+3, and then have both the inner and outer 3's have exit 6?"

1: Future-proofing - if the dual dual section is extended southward, no additional road work is needed for the northbound exits.
2: Operational considerations - the whole point of fully separate roadways is that, when necessary, one of them can be closed with the other one handling all the traffic. If the car only roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6. If the outer car+truck roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6.

What he was saying is have the same m/o as Exit 14 SB before the current configuration that it now has. The original SB Exit 14 only departed from the outer roadway and still actually does for the Eastern Spur. The split for the inner- outer on the Eastern Spur has Exit 14 split from the outer roadway immediately after the split, but before the western spur merges.

[ran4sh]

And that wouldn't be better than what was actually built, so that's probably why they did it that way.

[roadman65]

When the outer roadway was closed in the past, the flip panels at the East and West Spurs did allow local use for the outer roadway to access Exit 14 just as if the Eastern Spur gets closed, NB traffic is allowed to use the closed Eastern Spur up to the 15E split.

The flip panels for the closed Eastern Spur reflect partial usage to Exit 15E when in that configuration and the pull through flips at 15E would change from THRU TRAFFIC next exit 5 miles to ROAD CLOSED.  Ditto for the outer roadway SB for 14 to 14C.

[jeffandnicole]

"Why have the road become 3+3, and then have both the inner and outer 3's have exit 6?"

1: Future-proofing - if the dual dual section is extended southward, no additional road work is needed for the northbound exits.
2: Operational considerations - the whole point of fully separate roadways is that, when necessary, one of them can be closed with the other one handling all the traffic. If the car only roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6. If the outer car+truck roadway is closed, traffic still has access to exit 6.

What he was saying is have the same m/o as Exit 14 SB before the current configuration that it now has. The original SB Exit 14 only departed from the outer roadway and still actually does for the Eastern Spur. The split for the inner- outer on the Eastern Spur has Exit 14 split from the outer roadway immediately after the split, but before the western spur merges.

So we're questioning why they didn't design Interchange 6 by copying a poor design from decades ago which had a very obvious operating deficiency and has since been corrected.

And i thought I wrote absurd stuff.

[lstone19]

What he was saying is have the same m/o as Exit 14 SB before the current configuration that it now has. The original SB Exit 14 only departed from the outer roadway and still actually does for the Eastern Spur. The split for the inner- outer on the Eastern Spur has Exit 14 split from the outer roadway immediately after the split, but before the western spur merges.

I believe the inner/outer split is at the same spot it's always been for SB Eastern alignment traffic. The ramp to exit 14 is then half a mile later and inside the merge/split complex. Compare that to as-built when exit 14 traffic went 1-1/2 miles on the outer roadway before actually exiting and a good mile south of the merge/split complex.

Looking at the design, there really isn't another good option without adding even more complexity. A necessary feature of  merge/split like that is one roadway splits and puts its two halves on both sides of the other road which then does its own split once. Short of building a second bridge parallel to the one the Eastern to outer traffic uses, there's no way to get 14 traffic off before the eastern SB split.

To me, this design, dual-dual to dual-triple (or is that triple-dual?), is a thing of genius. No weaving sections (the closest is the 4/10 of a mile between where the NB inner and outer merge to become the eastern and Exit 15E (traffic from the inner exiting at 15E have to get over fairly quickly). Is it perfect? No, but it's a lot better than what a lot of states would do.