PA Turnpike News

Started by mightyace, February 16, 2009, 05:29:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Compulov

Quote from: Mr_Northside on November 15, 2012, 01:58:17 PM
So they can meet their "obligations" by raising tolls 3% each year? Nifty.
The problem is the notion of raising tolls 3% EVERY year should not be acceptable to anyone associated with making transportation policy. 
Obviously, toll rates do need to increase every so often, what with inflation and all (and, as much as I'd hate seeing gas prices rise, the gas tax should too), but 3% annually seems excessive and unsustainable in the long run.

The bottom line is Act 44 is complete, total, and utter BULLSHIT!  And I don't have any faith in Harrisburg to do anything about anytime soon.

Agreed. Now that the election season is over, I need to bug my state reps again about repealing that POS. I don't have a problem with tolls. I do have a problem with tolls being used to fund shortfalls in the general transportation budget. Why tax just the turnpike users for general funding for mass transit and other roads in PA? If PA needs transportation money, then PA needs to raise taxes. How long do they think they can keep raising tolls until it starts cutting into their usage? Or maybe they figure with the number of commuters who have no practical alternatives, they'd be set.


ARMOURERERIC

Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

Compulov

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

This is the same model that ADOT uses to fund the freeway system around Phoenix. I think it's a great idea, given that most of the traffic on these roads is probably all within the metro area (so you're generally taxing the people who benefit the most from the system). It comes as close as possible to a usage-based system as you can get without implementing tolls.

PAHighways

Pa. turnpike had early impact on nation's motoring history - Johnstown Tribune-Review

Just a "Cliff Notes" version of its history.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

Isn't there some sort of funding mechanism like the above in Orange County (Calif.) that is limited to that county? 

And might explain why I-5 (Santa Ana Freeway) is in dramatically better condition in Orange County than it is in Los Angeles County?
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.

ARMOURERERIC

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 03, 2012, 06:54:39 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

Isn't there some sort of funding mechanism like the above in Orange County (Calif.) that is limited to that county? 

And might explain why I-5 (Santa Ana Freeway) is in dramatically better condition in Orange County than it is in Los Angeles County?

Yes, IIRC all of the peripheral counties in metro LA have this mechanism in place, I believe LA County does as well, but they blow it all on the LA Metro, now in San Diego, prior to both the 1984 vote and the 2004 renewal, specified the allocation breakdown for mass transit, local roads and freeways.

BigRedDog

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

One problem: the voters did not pass a 1% sales tax for stadiums in Pittsburgh. In fact, the plan was to increase the sales tax .5% in 11 counties in the Pittsburgh Metro area to pay for two new stadiums and a convention center in Pittsburgh as well as building road, bridge, sewer, water and industrial park projects in all 11 counties. That referendum was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters in all 11 counties in of November 1997. (To be fair, I don't know the history behind the Philadelphia stadiums.)

ARMOURERERIC

Quote from: BigRedDog on December 03, 2012, 10:42:01 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

One problem: the voters did not pass a 1% sales tax for stadiums in Pittsburgh. In fact, the plan was to increase the sales tax .5% in 11 counties in the Pittsburgh Metro area to pay for two new stadiums and a convention center in Pittsburgh as well as building road, bridge, sewer, water and industrial park projects in all 11 counties. That referendum was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters in all 11 counties in of November 1997. (To be fair, I don't know the history behind the Philadelphia stadiums.)

I left PA in 1985, I am glad to see the attempt was at least made in 1997 for SW PA, I was worried that a mechanism like that may have been prohibited by PA's constitution.  But it has been 14 years, maybe it should be attempted again, when does the Heinz Field tax end?

BigRedDog

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 03, 2012, 11:32:31 PM
Quote from: BigRedDog on December 03, 2012, 10:42:01 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

One problem: the voters did not pass a 1% sales tax for stadiums in Pittsburgh. In fact, the plan was to increase the sales tax .5% in 11 counties in the Pittsburgh Metro area to pay for two new stadiums and a convention center in Pittsburgh as well as building road, bridge, sewer, water and industrial park projects in all 11 counties. That referendum was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters in all 11 counties in of November 1997. (To be fair, I don't know the history behind the Philadelphia stadiums.)

I left PA in 1985, I am glad to see the attempt was at least made in 1997 for SW PA, I was worried that a mechanism like that may have been prohibited by PA's constitution.  But it has been 14 years, maybe it should be attempted again, when does the Heinz Field tax end?

There is no tax. That's what I'm saying. The proposal to add .5% to the sales tax was defeated, rejected, shot down, kaput. It didn't happen. Heinz Field (and PNC Park and the David L. Lawrence Convention Center) were paid for with money given by the city, the county and the commonwealth from existing sources. Granted, the taxpayers are footing the bill, but not because they chose to do so, but because the politicians decided to ignore the will of the people.

ARMOURERERIC

I guess that's where I got confused:  My folks still live in Allegheny County (McCandless) and they always told me that the 1% sales tax for stadiums only had been approved by the voters.

BigRedDog

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 04, 2012, 12:31:54 AM
I guess that's where I got confused:  My folks still live in Allegheny County (McCandless) and they always told me that the 1% sales tax for stadiums only had been approved by the voters.

The sales tax in PA is 6%. Passed in 1994, Allegheny County started imposing an extra 1% that is split between reducing local taxes and for funding of regional assets (museums, parks, libraries, cultural groups, et. al.) Part of that money did go to funding the two Pittsburgh stadiums, but the 1% sales tax increase of 1994 was enacted by political leaders and is not the "Plan A" .5% sales tax referendum that was soundly rejected in 1997.

KEVIN_224

I seem to remember the sales tax showing as 7% whenever I bought something in Philadelphia.

PHLBOS

Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 04, 2012, 01:14:47 AM
I seem to remember the sales tax showing as 7% whenever I bought something in Philadelphia.
Philly's sales tax was bumped up to 7% in 1991 and was later increased to 8% just a few years ago.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

vdeane

Quote from: BigRedDog on December 03, 2012, 11:46:28 PM
There is no tax. That's what I'm saying. The proposal to add .5% to the sales tax was defeated, rejected, shot down, kaput. It didn't happen. Heinz Field (and PNC Park and the David L. Lawrence Convention Center) were paid for with money given by the city, the county and the commonwealth from existing sources. Granted, the taxpayers are footing the bill, but not because they chose to do so, but because the politicians decided to ignore the will of the people.
The vote was only for the additional .5% sales tax, not the stadium.  Plus "your money" ceases to be yours the moment it's paid in taxes.  Once that happens, it's the government's money (refunds are not "giving back your money" but rather paying a debt they incurred when you overpaid).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

BigRedDog

Quote from: deanej on December 04, 2012, 11:01:55 AM
Quote from: BigRedDog on December 03, 2012, 11:46:28 PM
There is no tax. That's what I'm saying. The proposal to add .5% to the sales tax was defeated, rejected, shot down, kaput. It didn't happen. Heinz Field (and PNC Park and the David L. Lawrence Convention Center) were paid for with money given by the city, the county and the commonwealth from existing sources. Granted, the taxpayers are footing the bill, but not because they chose to do so, but because the politicians decided to ignore the will of the people.
The vote was only for the additional .5% sales tax, not the stadium.  Plus "your money" ceases to be yours the moment it's paid in taxes.  Once that happens, it's the government's money (refunds are not "giving back your money" but rather paying a debt they incurred when you overpaid).

You're right that the vote was "only for the additional .5% sales tax" and was not directly a vote for against building the new stadiums. However, it was a vote on how to fund the projects with the proposed .5% increase going directly to fund the stadiums, the convention center and road, bridge, sewer, water and industrial park projects in all 11 counties.

mc78andrew

Quote from: PHLBOS on December 04, 2012, 08:41:42 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 04, 2012, 01:14:47 AM
I seem to remember the sales tax showing as 7% whenever I bought something in Philadelphia.
Philly's sales tax was bumped up to 7% in 1991 and was later increased to 8% just a few years ago.

Philly also has a wage tax.  Tough place to make a living. 

kendancy66

#441
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 03, 2012, 06:54:39 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on November 20, 2012, 09:09:19 AM
Even though I no longer live in PA, I have written representtives there to promote the SoCal model:  Giving an MPO the ability to go to the ballot box to raise a 1/4% sales tax for transportation.  In San Diego, there is a predetermined split 35% freeways. 35% mass transit, 30% local roads.  It raises a sh**load of $$, If the voters passsed a 1% sales tax for stadiums in PItts and Philly, this should be at least presented tot hem as well.

Isn't there some sort of funding mechanism like the above in Orange County (Calif.) that is limited to that county?

You are thinking of Measure M.  I think it adds 1/2% to the sales tax
Quote
And might explain why I-5 (Santa Ana Freeway) is in dramatically better condition in Orange County than it is in Los Angeles County?

I think that I-5 is one of first projects that got Measure M money, but I am not sure.  I am sure that SR-22 was rebuilt with Measure M money.  Pretty much every freeway in Orange County has had a measure M project performed on it.

PLEASE use quote tags properly

ARMOURERERIC

Now that work is wrapping up on 3 laning/reconstruction from PA8 to Warrendale and commencing from PA 8 to PA 28, what, if any will be the next Pittsburgh segment to be widened?  I am having difficulty gleaning that info from the Capital Improvement Plan

Mr_Northside

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 05, 2012, 01:08:35 AM
Now that work is wrapping up on 3 laning/reconstruction from PA8 to Warrendale and commencing from PA 8 to PA 28, what, if any will be the next Pittsburgh segment to be widened?  I am having difficulty gleaning that info from the Capital Improvement Plan

Yeah... their website doesn't do so well in spelling out their long-range plans anymore.

I know they are planning on replacing the Beaver River Bridge, and maybe doing some of the Beaver Valley to Cranberry section.  No longer sure what the timetables are for any of that though.

Eventually, I'm sure they want to get the rest widened/reconstructed between Irwin (US-30) & Allegheny Valley (PA-28).... Though they might (at least, I'm guessing) be trying to squeeze more life out of some fairly major (4-lane) structures in that area (One near the Irwin interchange, One just about right in the middle of Monroeville <-> Alleg. Valley).  I'm also guessing that's the reason the 6-laning & reconstruction ended about 1-1/2 mile west of the PA-8 exit.
I don't have opinions anymore. All I know is that no one is better than anyone else, and everyone is the best at everything

cpzilliacus

TOLLROADSnews: Snow and ice policy changes generate angst at Penn Pike sheds

QuotePennsylvania Turnpike employees have always been proud of the work they do to keep their roadways clear and safe through the winter. And with some justification. The Turnpike's east-west mainline mostly I-76 and the north-south I-476 NE Extension both have the reputation for being the best ways to travel in ice and snow. Whereas Penn DOT has a reputation for struggling to avert ice or clear snow properly the Turnpike has been pretty consistent in delivering a safe roadway with a "bare pavement" policy based on spreading large quantities of salt ahead, and then deploying large fleets of plows to move snow off the travel lanes.

QuoteIn the north the local wisdom in wintry weather is "forget 80, go down to the Turnpike" and in the east it's "forget 81, go with the (NE) Extension" - because the Turnpike's handling of ice and snow is superior to that of the state DOT on the untolled interstates. Presumably the same is true with the north-south routes in the west.

QuoteEarly in the winter a guy in one of the maintenance sheds - we'll call him Murphy - told us the Turnpike's superior performance in winter is being put in jeopardy by a new set of PennDOT managers taking over "the third floor" in the Turnpike's central office.
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.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 04, 2013, 08:22:09 AM
TOLLROADSnews: Snow and ice policy changes generate angst at Penn Pike sheds
QuoteEarly in the winter a guy in one of the maintenance sheds - we'll call him Murphy - told us the Turnpike's superior performance in winter is being put in jeopardy by a new set of PennDOT managers taking over "the third floor" in the Turnpike's central office.

From my experences salting roadways, no matter what policies are created internally regarding how much salt to put on the roads, the plow/salt truck operator just has to use judgement on how much needs to be applied and where. 

Before a storm, putting salt out is senseless.  Just like a candy wrapper flying around from passing vehicles, most of the salt on a dry road has nothing to stick to, and will mostly be breezed over to the shoulders.  Sure, some salt gets crushed by passing vehicles, but compared to what is being spread on the roads, the benefits are minute.

That's why brine is preferred before a storm. But even then, after the storm intensifies, there's not much that can be done to keep the roads cleared until after the storm is over, or the road temp rises to about 32 degrees.

Roadsguy

QuotePenn DOT

That'd better just be a typo. :pan:
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2013, 08:45:19 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 04, 2013, 08:22:09 AM
TOLLROADSnews: Snow and ice policy changes generate angst at Penn Pike sheds
QuoteEarly in the winter a guy in one of the maintenance sheds - we'll call him Murphy - told us the Turnpike's superior performance in winter is being put in jeopardy by a new set of PennDOT managers taking over "the third floor" in the Turnpike's central office.

From my experences salting roadways, no matter what policies are created internally regarding how much salt to put on the roads, the plow/salt truck operator just has to use judgement on how much needs to be applied and where.

I agree.  This is why simple-sounding "dump truck drivers" with experience doing this sort of work need to be well-compensated.  And why dump truck drivers that have knowledge of the highways they are treating are an important asset.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2013, 08:45:19 AM
Before a storm, putting salt out is senseless.  Just like a candy wrapper flying around from passing vehicles, most of the salt on a dry road has nothing to stick to, and will mostly be breezed over to the shoulders.  Sure, some salt gets crushed by passing vehicles, but compared to what is being spread on the roads, the benefits are minute.

I agree.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2013, 08:45:19 AM
That's why brine is preferred before a storm. But even then, after the storm intensifies, there's not much that can be done to keep the roads cleared until after the storm is over, or the road temp rises to about 32 degrees.

There are places where temperatures can stay below freezing for many, many days, yet snow and ice must be dealt with anyway.
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.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 04, 2013, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2013, 08:45:19 AM
That's why brine is preferred before a storm. But even then, after the storm intensifies, there's not much that can be done to keep the roads cleared until after the storm is over, or the road temp rises to about 32 degrees.

There are places where temperatures can stay below freezing for many, many days, yet snow and ice must be dealt with anyway.

Thus, the *or*. :-)

When both factors are at play (storm & cold temps), the best the road crews can do is keep the roads passible. 

When the temps rise, the snow/ice won't stick and/or melt from the roadway, even if it is still snowing. 

When the storm ends, the crews can work on getting the snow and/or ice off the roadways, even if temps are below the freezing point. 

But clearing roads during a storm, below 32 degrees, is simply impossible, no matter how much people think it can magically happen!

PAHighways

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 05, 2012, 01:08:35 AM
Now that work is wrapping up on 3 laning/reconstruction from PA8 to Warrendale and commencing from PA 8 to PA 28, what, if any will be the next Pittsburgh segment to be widened?  I am having difficulty gleaning that info from the Capital Improvement Plan

I have the old timetable on my site, but that went out the window when Act 44 began eating into their budget.



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.