I-95/Penna Turnpike Interchange

[famartin]

I never had a real problem with Philly not being used on the NJ Turnpike living in NJ my entire childhood and early adulthood life, but did think it was odd though.  Not odd enough though to get anal like some here do, but since old NJ road photos submitted here did show Philadelphia as a control city on US 1 & 9 south at US 22 back in the 1940's does now allow me to see why Philadelphia is now wanting to be changed to all I-95 signage.

The NJTP has always been an outer bypass superhighway of SE PA.  I-295 is the local access freeway that provides access between NJ and SE PA.  As such it makes sense to have Philadelphia directive signing on I-295 but not on the NJTP.

It may be a bypass, but it's also the main highway to Philly from NYC and points north in the magalopolis. I-95 also bypasses DC, but Washington is prominently signed, because it's the main access. Philly is one of the largest cities in the country, larger than Baltimore, and certainly far larger than Wilmington and Trenton. Now that it is truly directly connected, it deserves proper signage.

Honestly I can't really fathom why this is even argument.

[jeffandnicole]

I never had a real problem with Philly not being used on the NJ Turnpike living in NJ my entire childhood and early adulthood life, but did think it was odd though.  Not odd enough though to get anal like some here do, but since old NJ road photos submitted here did show Philadelphia as a control city on US 1 & 9 south at US 22 back in the 1940's does now allow me to see why Philadelphia is now wanting to be changed to all I-95 signage.

The NJTP has always been an outer bypass superhighway of SE PA.  I-295 is the local access freeway that provides access between NJ and SE PA.  As such it makes sense to have Philadelphia directive signing on I-295 but not on the NJTP.

It may be a bypass, but it’s also the main highway to Philly from NYC and points north in the magalopolis. I-95 also bypasses DC, but Washington is prominently signed, because it’s the main access. Philly is one of the largest cities in the country, larger than Baltimore, and certainly far larger than Wilmington and Trenton. Now that it is truly directly connected, it deserves proper signage.

Honestly I can’t really fathom why this is even argument.

While I don't think it's much of an argument, you're not going to find Maryland in any hurry to change a bunch of signs due to a highway project a few states away.  And being "New York" fits nicely on a smaller sign than "Philadelphia", don't be surprised if Maryland never changes their choice of a control city.

[Beltway]

The NJTP has always been an outer bypass superhighway of SE PA.  I-295 is the local access freeway that provides access between NJ and SE PA.  As such it makes sense to have Philadelphia directive signing on I-295 but not on the NJTP.

It may be a bypass, but it's also the main highway to Philly from NYC and points north in the magalopolis. I-95 also bypasses DC, but Washington is prominently signed, because it's the main access. Philly is one of the largest cities in the country, larger than Baltimore, and certainly far larger than Wilmington and Trenton. Now that it is truly directly connected, it deserves proper signage.

Now that the I-95/PA Turnpike connection is complete, certainly so.  But before then the NJTP didn't really connect Philadelphia from/to the north, it is an outer bypass with widely spaced interchanges, and it was only thru long connecting freeways that it would connect to Philadelphia, or thru sections of surface highway.

The Capital Beltway provides far more access and much closer to Washington, along with 3 Interstate auxiliary routes into D.C., than the NJTP/DMBridge that completely bypasses Pennsylvania.

[cpzilliacus]

It may be a bypass, but it's also the main highway to Philly from NYC and points north in the magalopolis. I-95 also bypasses DC, but Washington is prominently signed, because it's the main access. Philly is one of the largest cities in the country, larger than Baltimore, and certainly far larger than Wilmington and Trenton. Now that it is truly directly connected, it deserves proper signage.

Honestly I can't really fathom why this is even argument.

The issue IMO is I-95 in Maryland.  Especially I-95 between Baltimore and the Delaware border (in particular Baltimore City, Baltimore County (north and east of Baltimore), Harford County and Cecil County), where the road is maintained by the Maryland Transportation Authority (the state toll road and toll crossing agency).  Formerly (as in up to the 1980's), many of the signs on MDTA-maintained I-95 northbound had "N J Turnpike" as the "control city," which may influence current control city choice of New York and one of the small towns along the way in Maryland. No mention currently of Wilmington and no mention of Philadelphia.

Even south of Baltimore, where the "free" road is maintained by the State Highway Administration, there's exactly one mention of Philadelphia on a mileage sign (mostly obscured by an illegally parked tractor-trailer combination just north of the rest area at North Laurel, and the emphasis on the northbound side everywhere  else south of Baltimore is on New York and Baltimore.

Prior to now, when the I-95 gap existed, I could make sense of signing only New York, because putting (for example) New York, Philadelphia and Wilmington on one panel implied at least to some drivers that taking I-95 past Wilmington and Philly would lead to New York City, which the road did not.   

But that is no longer an issue, since I-95 is complete, and I personally believe all three of the major cities beyond Maryland should be on the mileage signs starting at some point north of the Capital Beltway.

[jp the roadgeek]

If all 3 are put on a mileage sign, the question would be if the mileage to NYC is via I-95 or via the NJTP.  Might need to label NYC as "New York City via NJTP" assuming it is the mileage if you take the Delaware Bridge instead of going through Philly.

[ipeters61]

If all 3 are put on a mileage sign, the question would be if the mileage to NYC is via I-95 or via the NJTP.  Might need to label NYC as "New York City via NJTP" assuming it is the mileage if you take the Delaware Bridge instead of going through Philly.

It might be implied because once you arrive in Delaware (specifically past the Christiana Mall complex), traffic towards New York and New Jersey is directed onto I-295, traffic towards Philadelphia is directed onto I-495, and traffic towards Wilmington is directed to stay on I-95.

[jeffandnicole]

If all 3 are put on a mileage sign, the question would be if the mileage to NYC is via I-95 or via the NJTP.  Might need to label NYC as "New York City via NJTP" assuming it is the mileage if you take the Delaware Bridge instead of going through Philly.

It wouldn't matter anyway. There are so many exits to take from the NJ Turnpike to get into NYC that another few miles added on via 95 won't make much of a difference.  It's probably real tough to find a mileage sign that exists today and figure out exactly what they're determining where that mileage leads to at or within the city.

[SignBridge]

I agree with J&N. If you're in Maryland, an approx. mileage by either route to NYC should suffice for most drivers.

[bzakharin]

I never had a real problem with Philly not being used on the NJ Turnpike living in NJ my entire childhood and early adulthood life, but did think it was odd though.  Not odd enough though to get anal like some here do, but since old NJ road photos submitted here did show Philadelphia as a control city on US 1 & 9 south at US 22 back in the 1940's does now allow me to see why Philadelphia is now wanting to be changed to all I-95 signage.

The NJTP has always been an outer bypass superhighway of SE PA.  I-295 is the local access freeway that provides access between NJ and SE PA.  As such it makes sense to have Philadelphia directive signing on I-295 but not on the NJTP.

It may be a bypass, but it's also the main highway to Philly from NYC and points north in the magalopolis. I-95 also bypasses DC, but Washington is prominently signed, because it's the main access. Philly is one of the largest cities in the country, larger than Baltimore, and certainly far larger than Wilmington and Trenton. Now that it is truly directly connected, it deserves proper signage.

Honestly I can't really fathom why this is even argument.

More precisely, the Turnpike does not go to Philly. I-95 does. I assume signing or not signing Philadelphia would depend on how much the NJ Turnpike wants to acknowledge that it's I-95. The PA Turnpike seems to be all in on the identity change, but they have nothing to lose from such unlike the NJ Turnpike.

[Roadrunner75]

Google Maps is finally showing the ramps tonight, but not traffic on them yet.  Still 276 for now, too...

[Roadsguy]

Google Maps is finally showing the ramps tonight, but not traffic on them yet.  Still 276 for now, too...

Only as ramps, though, which they're not; they're Interstate mainline. I suspect they'll change that when they fix the routes in another week and a half, since that's how they usually handle Interstates on "ramps" at interchanges.

EDIT: Seems the routes are changed in the database, but not fully updated yet. Try reporting a data problem on any of new I-95 (or I-295 between the start of the flyovers and the bridge over the Turnpike) and checking off "select the entire road." The new designations are listed in there, though actually selecting all of them shows that it hasn't fully gone through yet.

[bzakharin]

Google Maps is finally showing the ramps tonight, but not traffic on them yet.  Still 276 for now, too...

Only as ramps, though, which they're not; they're Interstate mainline. I suspect they'll change that when they fix the routes in another week and a half, since that's how they usually handle Interstates on "ramps" at interchanges.

EDIT: Seems the routes are changed in the database, but not fully updated yet. Try reporting a data problem on any of new I-95 (or I-295 between the start of the flyovers and the bridge over the Turnpike) and checking off "select the entire road." The new designations are listed in there, though actually selecting all of them shows that it hasn't fully gone through yet.

It looks like the routes are now correctly displayed (except the ramps are not designated as I-95). The exit number for US 13 is still listed as 359

[PHLBOS]

It looks like the routes are now correctly displayed (except the ramps are not designated as I-95). The exit number for US 13 is still listed as 359

Don't you mean 358? 

When I saw your post, I had to double-check to see if Google Maps indeed made a mistake in editing/updating (they didn't).  359 was for the now-gone mainline toll plaza at the base of the Delaware River Bridge.

[02 Park Ave]

Next Google Maps has to get the new spelling of the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge correct.

[briantroutman]

Today's "update"  to Google Maps is completely useless. The system doesn't even recognize that it's a traversable road. Here's the route it suggests to use getting from I-95 just south of the interchange to I-95 just north (east) of the interchange:



If you try to drag your starting point onto the flyover structure itself, Google Maps shows a dashed line indicating that you're first supposed to walk to the old Delaware Expressway mainline, then continue your journey eastbound (northbound) on I-295.

[vdeane]

Google Maps is finally showing the ramps tonight, but not traffic on them yet.  Still 276 for now, too...

Only as ramps, though, which they're not; they're Interstate mainline. I suspect they'll change that when they fix the routes in another week and a half, since that's how they usually handle Interstates on "ramps" at interchanges.

EDIT: Seems the routes are changed in the database, but not fully updated yet. Try reporting a data problem on any of new I-95 (or I-295 between the start of the flyovers and the bridge over the Turnpike) and checking off "select the entire road." The new designations are listed in there, though actually selecting all of them shows that it hasn't fully gone through yet.

How they have them is not inconsistent with how they've done other interstate TOTSO situations.

[Roadsguy]

Google Maps is finally showing the ramps tonight, but not traffic on them yet.  Still 276 for now, too...

Only as ramps, though, which they're not; they're Interstate mainline. I suspect they'll change that when they fix the routes in another week and a half, since that's how they usually handle Interstates on "ramps" at interchanges.

EDIT: Seems the routes are changed in the database, but not fully updated yet. Try reporting a data problem on any of new I-95 (or I-295 between the start of the flyovers and the bridge over the Turnpike) and checking off "select the entire road." The new designations are listed in there, though actually selecting all of them shows that it hasn't fully gone through yet.

How they have them is not inconsistent with how they've done other interstate TOTSO situations.

Really they're not very consistent with it at all. Compare the Springfield Interchange in Virginia to the other 95 split in Maryland. Or the two 83/695 interchanges north of Baltimore. Or the two 70-79 interchanges in Washington, PA, which are mapped the opposite of how each one should be.

----

And while the map should've been updated immediately, it's not surprising that different parts of the update take a while to go through.

[vdeane]

Also see all the interstate TOTSOs in Memphis and Nashville.  These ramps don't appear to be too dissimilar to those.

[bzakharin]

It looks like the routes are now correctly displayed (except the ramps are not designated as I-95). The exit number for US 13 is still listed as 359

Don't you mean 358? 

When I saw your post, I had to double-check to see if Google Maps indeed made a mistake in editing/updating (they didn't).  359 was for the now-gone mainline toll plaza at the base of the Delaware River Bridge.

You are right about 358. I was looking at this point: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1224305,-74.8541054,3a,75y,28.24h,95.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHbPav2__mFR_stBQXaDM8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1 which Google marks as Exit 359. It's a mistake Google makes in a few places (including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split is marked 16W) when an overhead sign can be interpreted as exit signage if you don't know the area

[NE2]

(including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split [on the ramp from I-80] is marked 16W)

As it should be: http://www.google.com/maps/@40.8381936,-74.0198008,3a,75y,200.6h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSshzLN8uO2_FngpIuZ3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's pretty clear that they intend the western spur for only exit 16W, and the eastern spur for all other traffic.

[bzakharin]

(including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split [on the ramp from I-80] is marked 16W)

As it should be: http://www.google.com/maps/@40.8381936,-74.0198008,3a,75y,200.6h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSshzLN8uO2_FngpIuZ3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's pretty clear that they intend the western spur for only exit 16W, and the eastern spur for all other traffic.

That's only true for traffic coming from I-80. I-95's corresponding signs (which are visible in your link) say that the eastern spur is only for exit 17 and the Western spur is "I-95 / NJ Turnpike / 16W". Both splits are marked 16W on Google Maps. And anyway those are VMSs that are potentially changeable.

[KEVIN_224]

Would it be correct if it said "TO EXIT 16W"?

[SignBridge]

(including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split [on the ramp from I-80] is marked 16W)

As it should be: http://www.google.com/maps/@40.8381936,-74.0198008,3a,75y,200.6h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSshzLN8uO2_FngpIuZ3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's pretty clear that they intend the western spur for only exit 16W, and the eastern spur for all other traffic.

That's only true for traffic coming from I-80. I-95's corresponding signs (which are visible in your link) say that the eastern spur is only for exit 17 and the Western spur is "I-95 / NJ Turnpike / 16W". Both splits are marked 16W on Google Maps. And anyway those are VMSs that are potentially changeable.

Bzakharin, do you know if that is the normal default setting for those NJT signs and/or does the NJTA change those recommended routes based on traffic conditions, events at the Meadowlands, etc.

[bzakharin]

(including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split [on the ramp from I-80] is marked 16W)

As it should be: http://www.google.com/maps/@40.8381936,-74.0198008,3a,75y,200.6h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSshzLN8uO2_FngpIuZ3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's pretty clear that they intend the western spur for only exit 16W, and the eastern spur for all other traffic.

That's only true for traffic coming from I-80. I-95's corresponding signs (which are visible in your link) say that the eastern spur is only for exit 17 and the Western spur is "I-95 / NJ Turnpike / 16W". Both splits are marked 16W on Google Maps. And anyway those are VMSs that are potentially changeable.

Bzakharin, do you know if that is the normal default setting for those NJT signs and/or does the NJTA change those recommended routes based on traffic conditions, events at the Meadowlands, etc.

Judging by the fact that all the GSV snapshots over 10 years are showing the same settings, I'd guess they are the default. I don't go out that way much. I do know that they change them due to congestion or closures, but not how frequently.

[Alps]

(including on the NJ Turnpike southbound where the Southbound Eastern/Western spur split [on the ramp from I-80] is marked 16W)

As it should be: http://www.google.com/maps/@40.8381936,-74.0198008,3a,75y,200.6h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSshzLN8uO2_FngpIuZ3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's pretty clear that they intend the western spur for only exit 16W, and the eastern spur for all other traffic.

That's only true for traffic coming from I-80. I-95's corresponding signs (which are visible in your link) say that the eastern spur is only for exit 17 and the Western spur is "I-95 / NJ Turnpike / 16W". Both splits are marked 16W on Google Maps. And anyway those are VMSs that are potentially changeable.

Bzakharin, do you know if that is the normal default setting for those NJT signs and/or does the NJTA change those recommended routes based on traffic conditions, events at the Meadowlands, etc.

They set the default to balance traffic between the legs. However, this strikes me as only balancing north of Route 3, as the Easterly is much more heavily loaded south of there. Of course, if you dump everyone on the Westerly, there are only 2 lanes to handle them north of Route 3, and it does get plenty congested over the Passaic River thanks to all the through traffic already going that way... so I'd say they're doing the best they can.