AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project  (Read 8557 times)

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« on: June 05, 2016, 12:56:48 PM »

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) is soliticting bids to replace much of the signage along JFK Highway (I-95) in Baltimore, Harford and Cecil Counties (details here).

All well and good - except - no mention of Wilmington or Philadelphia as control cities on I-95 northbound.  With the PTC and PennDOT actually making progress on getting enough of the interchange at Bristol done to complete I-95, I think it is time for Maryland to show Wilmington and especially Philadelphia as control cities on its signs north of Baltimore (and between the Capital Beltway and Baltimore as well).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1565
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:21:37 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2016, 01:12:11 PM »

All well and good - except - no mention of Wilmington or Philadelphia as control cities on I-95 northbound.  With the PTC and PennDOT actually making progress on getting enough of the interchange at Bristol done to complete I-95, I think it is time for Maryland to show Wilmington and especially Philadelphia as control cities on its signs north of Baltimore (and between the Capital Beltway and Baltimore as well).

I think both should be used as a second control city (possibly alternating), which is something I wish that states would use more often.  Still, as discussed in other threads, most long-distance traffic to New York would bypass Wilmington and Philadelphia via I-295 and the New Jersey Turnpike anyway.
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4776
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: Today at 10:47:18 AM
    • AARoads
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2016, 02:12:56 PM »

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) is soliticting bids to replace much of the signage along JFK Highway (I-95) in Baltimore, Harford and Cecil Counties (details here).

All well and good - except - no mention of Wilmington or Philadelphia as control cities on I-95 northbound.  With the PTC and PennDOT actually making progress on getting enough of the interchange at Bristol done to complete I-95, I think it is time for Maryland to show Wilmington and especially Philadelphia as control cities on its signs north of Baltimore (and between the Capital Beltway and Baltimore as well).

The bulk of those signs were replaced in 2012 to show Clearview font. Adjustments were made to mileage signs during that time, and a few control points where changed too. Are they swapping out signs again because of the end of Clearview?

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12329
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 02:14:37 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2016, 05:02:49 PM »

I think FHWA rules would favor Wilmington and New York as the two control cities. Nearest approved one, and a relatively close major destination. I know this gives Philly short shrift, but let's face it, who really doesn't know how to get to Philadelphia from Baltimore anyway? Philly will appear once traffic gets to the I-295/495 split, and can be supplemental before then.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2016, 07:18:40 PM »

I think both should be used as a second control city (possibly alternating), which is something I wish that states would use more often.  Still, as discussed in other threads, most long-distance traffic to New York would bypass Wilmington and Philadelphia via I-295 and the New Jersey Turnpike anyway.

This would IMO be the best approach - alternating Wilmington and Philadelphia. 

Mileage signs could ideally show all three in Maryland. 

I think FHWA rules would favor Wilmington and New York as the two control cities. Nearest approved one, and a relatively close major destination. I know this gives Philly short shrift, but let's face it, who really doesn't know how to get to Philadelphia from Baltimore anyway? Philly will appear once traffic gets to the I-295/495 split, and can be supplemental before then.

Do you (or I - or, for that matter, most members of this forum) have a problem getting from Charm City to the City of Brotherly Love?

Almost certainly not.  Most of us can probably navigate across the United States without a map or GPS unit, if the trip involves travel on Interstate or U.S. routes.

But there are people out there that rely on such signs to find their way to those places.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8943
  • Location: Orlando, fl
  • Last Login: April 16, 2019, 11:41:39 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2016, 07:34:26 PM »

Most people need the GPS to find their way up the street they live on now, so whether Philly is on it or not!  However, cause the Turnpike splits off before Philadelphia that takes most of the traffic going north (and most likely will even after the I-95 and PA Turnpike interchange ever gets built) is key factor to why NYC is used right from Baltimore.

It is one of those things, that happens due to circumstance and the locations of the cities involved.  Philly is basically in an awkward spot, is why it gets pushed aside.  Hey look at Newark, NJ getting shifted out because even though its a decent size city, it lies 8 miles away from the largest city in the US.  Even in Florida we have St. Petersburg that only gets to be a control city on US 19 as far north as Monticello, FL all because Tampa steels the spotlight as all other roads to the bay area head to Tampa first.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

MASTERNC

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 490
  • Last Login: April 15, 2019, 08:51:23 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2016, 08:39:39 PM »

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) is soliticting bids to replace much of the signage along JFK Highway (I-95) in Baltimore, Harford and Cecil Counties (details here).

All well and good - except - no mention of Wilmington or Philadelphia as control cities on I-95 northbound.  With the PTC and PennDOT actually making progress on getting enough of the interchange at Bristol done to complete I-95, I think it is time for Maryland to show Wilmington and especially Philadelphia as control cities on its signs north of Baltimore (and between the Capital Beltway and Baltimore as well).

The bulk of those signs were replaced in 2012 to show Clearview font. Adjustments were made to mileage signs during that time, and a few control points where changed too. Are they swapping out signs again because of the end of Clearview?

Doesn't appear so.  A lot of the signs seem to still have Clearview.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2016, 08:54:29 PM »

Most people need the GPS to find their way up the street they live on now, so whether Philly is on it or not!  However, cause the Turnpike splits off before Philadelphia that takes most of the traffic going north (and most likely will even after the I-95 and PA Turnpike interchange ever gets built) is key factor to why NYC is used right from Baltimore.

Years after the I-295/Delaware Memorial Bridge connection between the Delaware Turnpike and the New Jersey Turnpike was complete, the Delaware Expressway came to an end at a point between the site of present-day I-476 and Philadelphia International Airport - this was as recent as about 1977.  So many drivers got used to using the Delaware Memorial Bridge as a substitute for uncompleted I-95, and they are still used to that route. 

It is one of those things, that happens due to circumstance and the locations of the cities involved.  Philly is basically in an awkward spot, is why it gets pushed aside.  Hey look at Newark, NJ getting shifted out because even though its a decent size city, it lies 8 miles away from the largest city in the US.  Even in Florida we have St. Petersburg that only gets to be a control city on US 19 as far north as Monticello, FL all because Tampa steels the spotlight as all other roads to the bay area head to Tampa first.

Philadelphia is in an awkward spot largely because of the lack of a freeway connection between downtown Philly and New York City.  That will be remediated with the Bristol interchange project, and will pretty instantly put the city on the N-S I-95 corridor. 
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9853
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 02:43:05 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2016, 09:13:33 PM »

I still find it astonishing how many people are adamant that "the Jersey Turnpike IS I-95," even if they're referring to the southern portion.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13025
  • A sense of humor is a wonderful thing. Get one.

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: Today at 02:18:56 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2016, 09:15:04 PM »

I remember a smattering of button copy along that route. Guess it's time to say goodbye to it.
Logged

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9711
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 12:21:56 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2016, 09:56:22 PM »

I don't like Wilmington as a control city, only because of possible confusion with Wilmington, NC.

Lets face it...the name Philadelphia is longer, and thus the signs would cost more to make!
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2016, 11:01:45 PM »

I still find it astonishing how many people are adamant that "the Jersey Turnpike IS I-95," even if they're referring to the southern portion.

IMO a direct consequence of I-95 not being completed in Pennsylvania (and New Jersey, though the Jersey part has been completed but never signed for quite a few years).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2016, 11:03:07 PM »

I remember a smattering of button copy along that route. Guess it's time to say goodbye to it.

For quite a few years, the only buttoncopy left was in the two service plazas (Maryland House and Chesapeake House), but that has been gone since they were reconstructed.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2016, 11:07:34 PM »

I don't like Wilmington as a control city, only because of possible confusion with Wilmington, NC.

Lets face it...the name Philadelphia is longer, and thus the signs would cost more to make!

Wilmington, North Carolina is about 450 miles south from Havre de Grace, Maryland (Havre de Grace being roughly the halfway point in the corridor).  Wilmington, Delaware is about 37 miles north of Havre de Grace.  I don't see it as a problem.

Philadelphia will make for wider signs, but I do not see that as a big deal).     
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

swbrotha100

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 405
  • Last Login: October 02, 2016, 10:07:09 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2016, 11:23:07 PM »

I don't like Wilmington as a control city, only because of possible confusion with Wilmington, NC.

Lets face it...the name Philadelphia is longer, and thus the signs would cost more to make!

This is what I think is a reason. "New York" on NB signs is shorter than just about anything else that would go on a sign.
Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12329
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 36
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 02:14:37 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2016, 11:25:50 PM »

I don't like Wilmington as a control city, only because of possible confusion with Wilmington, NC.

Lets face it...the name Philadelphia is longer, and thus the signs would cost more to make!
By MUTCD, it would have to be shown Wilmington DE anyway because it's in a different state.
As for CPZ's point - if you're following your GPS, it will take you on 95. If you know Philly is north of Baltimore, you will take 95. You can't sign every single city on every single route. 95 south from New York could be Philadelphia, Trenton, Camden, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington... so you pick two.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2016, 10:24:13 AM »

I don't like Wilmington as a control city, only because of possible confusion with Wilmington, NC.

Lets face it...the name Philadelphia is longer, and thus the signs would cost more to make!
By MUTCD, it would have to be shown Wilmington DE anyway because it's in a different state.
As for CPZ's point - if you're following your GPS, it will take you on 95. If you know Philly is north of Baltimore, you will take 95. You can't sign every single city on every single route. 95 south from New York could be Philadelphia, Trenton, Camden, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington... so you pick two.

They annoying thing is that Philadelphia is faithfully signed by Maryland on U.S. 40 eastbound where it runs parallel to I-95.

And Wilmington is the "control city" for U.S. 301 from Queenstown north to the Delaware/Marland line.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8943
  • Location: Orlando, fl
  • Last Login: April 16, 2019, 11:41:39 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2016, 07:38:30 PM »

Yeah what is with "Philadelphia" being signed on US 40?  Also the fact that MD 7 is called Philadelphia Road leading out of Baltimore.

Also to note on US 301, the Wilmington had to be added on sometime in the late 80's or early 90's, as at the Queenstown Split US 301 had no control city.  In addition to that at Middletown where US 301 used to turn left before DelDOT realigned the US 301 and DE 299 intersection, it did say "New York" for a control city on a span wire assembly before it was later changed to "Del. Mem. Br."  So at least Wilmington is an improvement, even though its not the ideal place to use.

Also, for years the CBBT used "Philadelphia" for NB US 13 leaving the parking lot for the CBBT Fishing Pier and Gift Shop.  Despite Salisbury, Dover, and Wilmington all lying before it, it is odd that it gets used at all coming from that point 4 miles out in the Chesapeake Bay.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Thing 342

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1216
  • Age: 21
  • Location: NRV / HR, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:23:21 PM
    • Thing 342's Road Photos
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #18 on: June 08, 2016, 07:47:35 PM »

Also, for years the CBBT used "Philadelphia" for NB US 13 leaving the parking lot for the CBBT Fishing Pier and Gift Shop.  Despite Salisbury, Dover, and Wilmington all lying before it, it is odd that it gets used at all coming from that point 4 miles out in the Chesapeake Bay.
I went to the CBBT gift shop the other day, and the Philadelphia sign is still present (at least the one in the SB parking lot is, not sure about NB). I find it somewhat interesting, as most guidance signs on the Shore generally point to either local towns in VA or Salisbury.
Logged

storm2k

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 686
  • Age: 37
  • Location: NJ
  • Last Login: April 17, 2019, 06:32:38 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2016, 03:55:12 PM »

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) is soliticting bids to replace much of the signage along JFK Highway (I-95) in Baltimore, Harford and Cecil Counties (details here).

All well and good - except - no mention of Wilmington or Philadelphia as control cities on I-95 northbound.  With the PTC and PennDOT actually making progress on getting enough of the interchange at Bristol done to complete I-95, I think it is time for Maryland to show Wilmington and especially Philadelphia as control cities on its signs north of Baltimore (and between the Capital Beltway and Baltimore as well).

The bulk of those signs were replaced in 2012 to show Clearview font. Adjustments were made to mileage signs during that time, and a few control points where changed too. Are they swapping out signs again because of the end of Clearview?

Looks like they're installing bigger guide signs with larger legends on them. The drawings make it seem like they'll still be in Clearview, but given how this happens after Clearview isn't allowed anymore, it may see a return to Highway Gothic for these signs.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #20 on: June 17, 2016, 04:48:13 PM »

Looks like they're installing bigger guide signs with larger legends on them. The drawings make it seem like they'll still be in Clearview, but given how this happens after Clearview isn't allowed anymore, it may see a return to Highway Gothic for these signs.

At least for the section of I-95 that was formerly the tolled Northeast Expressway, then the JFK Highway (Md. 43, present-day Exit 67  to Md. 279, Exit 109 and slightly beyond to the Delaware line), they may be able to use Clearview anyway, because the State of Maryland has been careful to never take one cent of federal money to buy the land, build the road, and maintain and improve it over the years.  Generally, they have followed the MUTCD, but there are some federal requirements and rules that they probably do not have to obey because of the lack of federal dollars in the road.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

PurdueBill

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1162
  • Last Login: April 17, 2019, 02:33:09 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #21 on: June 17, 2016, 06:30:55 PM »

The date on the plans is "January 2016" (no day, just month/year) so the Clearview may be allowable based on the plans predating the edict to ditch it.  The sheets showing the signs and their locations seem to show Clearview everywhere in exit tabs, distances, and so on, but the detailed sign sheets show Clearview only in destination legend, with FHWA in exit numbers, distances, etc. so at least there is that.

Odd is that the relatively new signs out there are already being replaced.  The hard right arrows like those used for the loop ramps at I-95/MD 279 (for all the loop ramps, off 95 and off 279) are being replaced with slanted arrows, which is also odd--the hard right arrows were attention-getting.
I saw the existing signs at that interchange at night just two weeks ago and they are very bright and visible, especially with the LED underlighting.  Seems to be wasteful to be replacing them so soon.  The existing signs are not even five years old!
« Last Edit: June 19, 2016, 01:15:23 AM by PurdueBill »
Logged

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: April 17, 2019, 10:04:44 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2016, 08:00:11 PM »

Maryland was certainly the poster child of how to do Clearview wrong. Quite a few examples on the FHWA Clearview errors site were from the state.

CP, if federal funding is a factor of whether or not Clearview get used in future MdTA projects, than why has the NJ Turnpike Authority being pushed to comply with MUTCD signing standards?
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10215
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: April 09, 2019, 12:26:51 AM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2016, 10:01:35 PM »

Maryland was certainly the poster child of how to do Clearview wrong. Quite a few examples on the FHWA Clearview errors site were from the state.

CP, if federal funding is a factor of whether or not Clearview get used in future MdTA projects, than why has the NJ Turnpike Authority being pushed to comply with MUTCD signing standards?

Though I think that MDTA has generally gotten Clearview right.

I do not know why or how NJTA is being pushed to comply with MUTCD (and I always rather liked much of the unique signing along the Turnpike - exceptions being "secret" Route 700 and lack of reassurance assemblies (and ideally the number of miles to one or more control cities) after each interchange).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

mattpedersen

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 56
  • Last Login: April 16, 2019, 11:58:54 PM
Re: I-95 (JFK Highway) sign replacement project
« Reply #24 on: June 20, 2016, 06:42:10 PM »

I do not know why or how NJTA is being pushed to comply with MUTCD (and I always rather liked much of the unique signing along the Turnpike - exceptions being "secret" Route 700 and lack of reassurance assemblies (and ideally the number of miles to one or more control cities) after each interchange).
I personally liked the old school NJT signs. But they had to go modern on us.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.