I-195, does it *REALLY* need to be extended???

[route_82]

I was going to say - how many people are going to get lost looking for Exit 16?

Well, lemme think...

Exit 16 businesses already advertise that they're near or on the way to Six Flags, so that's probably not an issue...

Route 9 businesses say they're on Route 9...

Route 130 businesses say they're on Route 130...

Shore businesses show up after 195 ends...

The only people I could see being affected are the car dealership at Exit 31B and maybe Glory's at Exit 21. There's really not a lot of business primarily accessible from 195. Anything else?

I-195 (Exits 1-5) and (21-22)
Not to mention I-295 (exits 60-67)

[YankeesFan]

i think we need a petition or something to send to NJDOT and PADOT to stop this ridiculous extension. haha

[route_82]

i think we need a petition or something to send to NJDOT and PADOT to stop this ridiculous extension. haha

I'm with you on that one.

[Alps]

i think we need a petition or something to send to NJDOT and PADOT to stop this ridiculous extension. haha

a) Overkill. Petitions to stop or support a highway from being built are one thing. No one's going to take a petition seriously to change a route or exit number, outside of a select few on this forum only.
b) They debated numbering and picked 195 over 295. I'd be surprised if they didn't consider 695 as part of it.

Your best bet would be to call NJDOT and keep asking around until you get someone who can explain why they chose 195, and then voice your concerns.

[route_82]

Two years ago I spoke with a project manager about it... I think he was with Urban Engineers.  He said it was PennDOT's choice.  NJ just went along with it.  I mentioned the other numbers and he told me they considered it, but went with I-195 for some reason.  He didn't say why.

I hope AASHTO rejects it.

[Henry]

Two years ago I spoke with a project manager about it... I think he was with Urban Engineers.  He said it was PennDOT's choice.  NJ just went along with it.  I mentioned the other numbers and he told me they considered it, but went with I-195 for some reason.  He didn't say why.

I hope AASHTO rejects it.

So it was PA who wanted the number all along, and NJ had no choice but to agree on an extension to make it possible? As for AASHTO, the number should be rejected in favor of I-695, but you never know. A good example would be NC's original plans to number the Fayetteville Outer Loop as I-195 (sound familiar?), but that number got rejected in favor of I-295.

[akotchi]

I recall getting all lathered up about both ideas (I-295 or I-195 extensions) at the time I first saw them, for many of the same reasons expressed throughout this thread.  I also came up with many of the same suggestions expressed in this thread, even writing to the Project Office to recommend I-895 over I-95, all else remaining the same.  Their response was a polite "Thank you for your interest in the project."

I suppose it all boils down to what would confuse the motorist the least.  Of the two published choices, I-195 appears to do that.  Would the average motorist (or anyone aside from a few roadgeeks) care about the numbering rules of Interstate highways?

Besides, considering how messed up this area has been for so long (route-numbering, I mean), it would be poetic justice if current I-95 Exit 46 would be a junction of an east-west U.S. 1 (signed north-south) and a north-south I-195 (signed east-west) . . .

[jeffandnicole]

I was going to say - how many people are going to get lost looking for Exit 16?

The only people I could see being affected are the car dealership at Exit 31B and maybe Glory's at Exit 21. There's really not a lot of business primarily accessible from 195. Anything else?

Do a google search for 195, new jersey, directions, and other related search options, and you'll see that plenty of businesses and people use those exit numbers. 

Maybe you forgot about the large shopping center and office park off of Exit 5 - Rt. 130.

Maybe you forgot about the NJ Turnpike off Exit 6.

Maybe you forgot about the shore route many people take off Exit 7.

Mabye you forgot about the farms and houses people access from other exits.

Or maybe you simply think everyone goes to two destinations and to hell with everyone else.

If that's your mentality, then there should only be two interchanges along every highway.  The one you're getting on, and the one you're getting off.  The others are a waste and serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever.

[vdeane]

Two years ago I spoke with a project manager about it... I think he was with Urban Engineers.  He said it was PennDOT's choice.  NJ just went along with it.  I mentioned the other numbers and he told me they considered it, but went with I-195 for some reason.  He didn't say why.

I hope AASHTO rejects it.

They'd be more likely to reject I-695 I suspect.  Just look at how I-26 assimilated I-181.

If that's your mentality, then there should only be two interchanges along every highway.  The one you're getting on, and the one you're getting off.  The others are a waste and serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever.

I believe most people operate that way for short trips, which is probably what most of the traffic there is.

[hubcity]

I was going to say - how many people are going to get lost looking for Exit 16?

The only people I could see being affected are the car dealership at Exit 31B and maybe Glory's at Exit 21. There's really not a lot of business primarily accessible from 195. Anything else?

Do a google search for 195, new jersey, directions, and other related search options, and you'll see that plenty of businesses and people use those exit numbers. 

Maybe you forgot about the large shopping center and office park off of Exit 5 - Rt. 130.

Maybe you forgot about the NJ Turnpike off Exit 6.

Maybe you forgot about the shore route many people take off Exit 7.

Mabye you forgot about the farms and houses people access from other exits.

Or maybe you simply think everyone goes to two destinations and to hell with everyone else.

If that's your mentality, then there should only be two interchanges along every highway.  The one you're getting on, and the one you're getting off.  The others are a waste and serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever.

I stand corrected.

[YankeesFan]

i just find it funny...no one coming from PA (headed to jersey shore) is gonna take I-195 (the extended one) ALL the way around north of Trenton then back south to go to the current 195. they just use NJ 29.

It should be a different number (I-695) with *enter control city/destination here*

[hubcity]

One way to look at it, I suppose, would be to preserve the current notion that the highways on either side of the Delaware are north/south roads, whose northern terminus is at their junction with US 1. Viewing it that way, the only exits that would have to change would be those on the PA side, north of the 95/PA Tpk intersection.

If you were to view it that way, anyway.

[Alps]

i just find it funny...no one coming from PA (headed to jersey shore) is gonna take I-195 (the extended one) ALL the way around north of Trenton then back south to go to the current 195. they just use NJ 29.

It should be a different number (I-695) with *enter control city/destination here*

NJ 29 can get backed up during rush hour or Thunder games, not to mention numerous lights and a lower speed limit, not to mention truck limitations.

[route_82]

One way to look at it, I suppose, would be to preserve the current notion that the highways on either side of the Delaware are north/south roads, whose northern terminus is at their junction with US 1. Viewing it that way, the only exits that would have to change would be those on the PA side, north of the 95/PA Tpk intersection.

If you were to view it that way, anyway.

That's what I've been saying actually... only the exits in PA really have to change.  The least fuss.  I mean really, I-95 is changing... so change existing I-95.  Why drag I-295 and I-195 into it?  Leave them be.

Commuters and regular drivers knowing I-95 is moving to the TPK expect old I-95 to change to a new number... but commuters of I-295 (exit 60-67) to Route 1 don't expect their route number to change, nor do the commuters and regular drivers expect the exit numbers on I-195 (1-34) to suddenly change for no real reason.  It's arbitrary and pointless.

By the way, if this goes through, I expect I-195 at Route 34 will go from Exit 35 to Exit 49 or 50.  That's a big adjustment.

[YankeesFan]

i just find it funny...no one coming from PA (headed to jersey shore) is gonna take I-195 (the extended one) ALL the way around north of Trenton then back south to go to the current 195. they just use NJ 29.

It should be a different number (I-695) with *enter control city/destination here*

NJ 29 can get backed up during rush hour or Thunder games, not to mention numerous lights and a lower speed limit, not to mention truck limitations.

yeah it can get backed up (i live in the area). the lights are not that numerous though, and no one adheres the speed limit. and until you get to the thunder stadium there usually isnt much traffic. def the faster route.

[Alex]

By the way, if this goes through, I expect I-195 at Route 34 will go from Exit 35 to Exit 49 or 50.  That's a big adjustment.

Maybe they'll just add 100 to the existing exit numbers to make it easy for people to adjust. 

Two years ago I spoke with a project manager about it... I think he was with Urban Engineers.  He said it was PennDOT's choice.  NJ just went along with it.  I mentioned the other numbers and he told me they considered it, but went with I-195 for some reason.  He didn't say why.

I hope AASHTO rejects it.

They approved the truncation of US 113 south from Dover to Milford, they won't reject it...

[vdeane]

One way to look at it, I suppose, would be to preserve the current notion that the highways on either side of the Delaware are north/south roads, whose northern terminus is at their junction with US 1. Viewing it that way, the only exits that would have to change would be those on the PA side, north of the 95/PA Tpk intersection.

If you were to view it that way, anyway.

That's what I've been saying actually... only the exits in PA really have to change.  The least fuss.  I mean really, I-95 is changing... so change existing I-95.  Why drag I-295 and I-195 into it?  Leave them be.

Commuters and regular drivers knowing I-95 is moving to the TPK expect old I-95 to change to a new number... but commuters of I-295 (exit 60-67) to Route 1 don't expect their route number to change, nor do the commuters and regular drivers expect the exit numbers on I-195 (1-34) to suddenly change for no real reason.  It's arbitrary and pointless.

By the way, if this goes through, I expect I-195 at Route 34 will go from Exit 35 to Exit 49 or 50.  That's a big adjustment.

Is US 1 that major an exit that all the commute patters are predominantly to one side or the other rather than through?  I'm guessing not, and as such, it makes sense for it to be one highway.

[route_82]

One way to look at it, I suppose, would be to preserve the current notion that the highways on either side of the Delaware are north/south roads, whose northern terminus is at their junction with US 1. Viewing it that way, the only exits that would have to change would be those on the PA side, north of the 95/PA Tpk intersection.

If you were to view it that way, anyway.

That's what I've been saying actually... only the exits in PA really have to change.  The least fuss.  I mean really, I-95 is changing... so change existing I-95.  Why drag I-295 and I-195 into it?  Leave them be.

Commuters and regular drivers knowing I-95 is moving to the TPK expect old I-95 to change to a new number... but commuters of I-295 (exit 60-67) to Route 1 don't expect their route number to change, nor do the commuters and regular drivers expect the exit numbers on I-195 (1-34) to suddenly change for no real reason.  It's arbitrary and pointless.

By the way, if this goes through, I expect I-195 at Route 34 will go from Exit 35 to Exit 49 or 50.  That's a big adjustment.

Is US 1 that major an exit that all the commute patters are predominantly to one side or the other rather than through?  I'm guessing not, and as such, it makes sense for it to be one highway.

Actually yes.  I used to commute up I-295 to US 1 and a large portion of traffic does exit at US 1.  Drive by there sometime at Morning Peak and you'll witness cars lining the shoulder or right lane waiting to exit.  There are tons of business parks off US 1 north of Trenton.  Also, alot of people take US 1 instead of the Turnpike.

[YankeesFan]

US 1 is DEF a major exit.

[jeffandnicole]

Does Page 1 of this document clarify how major of an exit it is, and the issues that are currently under review?

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp13/sec3/route/rt295.pdf

One way to look at it, I suppose, would be to preserve the current notion that the highways on either side of the Delaware are north/south roads, whose northern terminus is at their junction with US 1. Viewing it that way, the only exits that would have to change would be those on the PA side, north of the 95/PA Tpk intersection.

If you were to view it that way, anyway.

That's what I've been saying actually... only the exits in PA really have to change.  The least fuss.  I mean really, I-95 is changing... so change existing I-95.  Why drag I-295 and I-195 into it?  Leave them be.

Commuters and regular drivers knowing I-95 is moving to the TPK expect old I-95 to change to a new number... but commuters of I-295 (exit 60-67) to Route 1 don't expect their route number to change, nor do the commuters and regular drivers expect the exit numbers on I-195 (1-34) to suddenly change for no real reason.  It's arbitrary and pointless.

By the way, if this goes through, I expect I-195 at Route 34 will go from Exit 35 to Exit 49 or 50.  That's a big adjustment.

Is US 1 that major an exit that all the commute patters are predominantly to one side or the other rather than through?  I'm guessing not, and as such, it makes sense for it to be one highway.

Does Page 1 of this document clarify how major of an exit it is, and the issues that are currently under review?

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcp13/sec3/route/rt295.pdf

[vdeane]

But does the majority of traffic exit there?

[PHLBOS]

.  Granted, one could've fudged it like I-287 in NJ (I-87 does not go into CT).

I know you mean NJ, but not to get off topic, I-87 did enter CT at one time when I-684 was signed as such. 

Oh snap, you're right; my bad.  I did mean NJ.  I've since fixed my earlier post.

It's not the proximity... They already have an SR 0295.  So what would they give I-295 in their system?

That didn't stop Maryland from designating much of US 40 as I-68 circa late-80s/early-90s even though there already is an unrelated MD 68 (which still holds that designation today).

Two years ago I spoke with a project manager about it... I think he was with Urban Engineers.  He said it was PennDOT's choice.  NJ just went along with it.  I mentioned the other numbers and he told me they considered it, but went with I-195 for some reason.  He didn't say why.

I have to wonder if PennDOT was looking at an old NJ map that predated the full I-295/195/NJ 29 interchange when they made their decision; the full interchange opened sometime in the mid-90s.

Prior to that time, I-295 made a sharp easterly turn and became I-195.

Had that condition still existed (no full I-195/295/NJ 29 interchange), than redesignating I-95/295 in that area as I-195 would've made more sense.

They'd probably do something similar to the I-283/PA 283 legislative routing, where one is officially a different number. In this case, what is signed PA 283 is legislatively SR 0300 and I-283 is SR 0283.

Now see, THAT doesn't make any sense... having I-283 and PA 283 *intersect* one another is ridiculous!  There is no PA Route 300, so why not just renumber it to that?? Why have PA 283?? I just don't get it.  It serves no purpose, it's not meant to be a continuation of the highway.

My guess is that the PA 283 highway was there before the I-283 leg.  And the likely reason why PennDOT did not redesignate PA 283 as I-283 was due to the fact that PA 283 would have needed to be upgraded to Interstate standards where needed and such would've required additional funding. 

Until recently, the major difference between a US or state highway vs. an Interstate was percentage of federal funding.  Interstates used to have an automatic 90-10 Federal-State funding ratio.

[Duke87]

It's not the proximity... They already have an SR 0295.  So what would they give I-295 in their system?

That didn't stop Maryland from designating much of US 40 as I-68 circa late-80s/early-90s even though there already is an unrelated MD 68 (which still holds that designation today).

Different states have different policies about repeating numbers which depend on how they refer to routes internally. The way Maryland does things allows them to differentiate between I-68 and MD 68. But many states simply refer to all routes as route XX and thus cannot have two routes with the same number, even if they are different classes. Connecticut renumbered CT 84 and CT 95 to CT 184 and CT 195 when I-84 and I-95 were introduced to the state in the 1950s, because having two routes with the same number is not possible with the way ConnDOT does their bookkeeping.

Pennsylvania has gotten around this issue before by having an alternate internal designation for their two interstates which duplicate state route numbers, but they still consider this unideal and would like to avoid having another instance of it.

[NE2]

Pennsylvania has gotten around this issue before by having an alternate internal designation for their two interstates which duplicate state route numbers, but they still consider this unideal and would like to avoid having another instance of it.

I-99 is another instance of it (PA 99 is now SR 0399 (?)).

[Beltway]

Pennsylvania has gotten around this issue before by having an alternate internal designation for their two interstates which duplicate state route numbers, but they still consider this unideal and would like to avoid having another instance of it.

This is an instance where the physical road network benefit would far exceed any internal 'issue' that might exist.