Toll Road Signage

[Takumi]

I think the "no interstate designation if it's a toll road" crap is a 21st century development (though I could easily be wrong). Most of the interstate toll roads elsewhere are older, many being turnpikes that predated the interstate system.

[NE2]

There's no such rule; see the extension of I-185 in SC. It's just that there's no real point in applying to FHWA/AASHTO for an Interstate designation if you're not getting anything for it.

[Brandon]

There's no such rule; see the extension of I-185 in SC. It's just that there's no real point in applying to FHWA/AASHTO for an Interstate designation if you're not getting anything for it.

What I've been trying tell some of these folks for a while.  It's NCDOT, not FHWA or AASHTO that's preventing this from being posted as an interstate.

[Takumi]

There's no such rule; see the extension of I-185 in SC. It's just that there's no real point in applying to FHWA/AASHTO for an Interstate designation if you're not getting anything for it.

What I've been trying tell some of these folks for a while.  It's NCDOT, not FHWA or AASHTO that's preventing this from being posted as an interstate.

I chose the word "development" because I knew this was a voluntary case. I just don't like it. Even VA 895 is slated to become an interstate once ownership is transferred back to the state (currently slated for the early 22nd century).

[mightyace]

^^^

Right, gentlemen.

In IL, the N-S tollway has always been I-355 and wasn't built all that long ago.  The E-W tollway was converted from IL 5 to I-88.  And, both I-39 and US 51 have been added to the NW tollway from Rockford to the WI line.

And, just this year, PA TOLL 60 became I-376.  (also a relatively new facility)

[broadhurst04]

There's no such rule; see the extension of I-185 in SC. It's just that there's no real point in applying to FHWA/AASHTO for an Interstate designation if you're not getting anything for it.

What I've been trying tell some of these folks for a while.  It's NCDOT, not FHWA or AASHTO that's preventing this from being posted as an interstate.

I don't understand. Do you mean that NCDOT chose not to pursue an Interstate designation because it was to their benefit not to? Would there have been no additional federal maintenance money coming to NC to reflect the increased mileage created by the southern half of the loop?

[KEK Inc.]

This reminds me of the new toll signs going up on SR-520 in Washington state.  



(A render I made, but for the interest of comparison it's fairly accurate.)  Interesting, yet not really surprising, how many D.O.T.s are phasing into fully automated tolling.

[Edited to remove unnecessary formatting. -S.]

[architect77]

Paying salaries for toll collectors indefinitely and having to stop to pay (and subsequent congestion) probably would have been 2 factors too distasteful for North Carolinians to accept.

By 2014 the toll to cross the GWB, Lincoln and Holland Tunnels will rise from $12 to $15. Absolutely hard to believe! They were $4 to cross back when I moved to NYC in 2000. I wonder how much those toll collectors make, grabbing fistfuls of money literally about every 10 seconds.

[roadman65]

There's no such rule; see the extension of I-185 in SC. It's just that there's no real point in applying to FHWA/AASHTO for an Interstate designation if you're not getting anything for it.

Is not the I-49 freeway near Belle Vista, AR to be a toll road if this interstate ever gets built this far north?

[J N Winkler]

I don't understand. Do you mean that NCDOT chose not to pursue an Interstate designation because it was to their benefit not to?  Would there have been no additional federal maintenance money coming to NC to reflect the increased mileage created by the southern half of the loop?

There are multiple issues here.

*  The part of the Raleigh loop that is now signed as NC 540 was originally intended to be built as I-540.  I think the deal is somewhat similar to SR 895 in Virginia, which was originally supposed to be I-895, and for which VDOT received some money from FHWA early in the planning process.  If the state DOT accepts money during the planning and design phase from FHWA for a proposed Interstate that is later built as a toll road with a state-route designation, then the toll road cannot be signed as an Interstate until it is later made into a free road or the state DOT pays back the money received from FHWA during the planning and design phases--whichever happens first.  (I think other presumptive counterexamples like I-355 got their Interstate designations because they were planned, designed, and built without federal funding.)

*  Under current rules, in order for a state DOT to get IM money for a non-chargeable Interstate, the Interstate designation has to have been in place before a certain cutoff date in 2003.  I don't know how this applies to Interstates which were planned but not built when this cutoff lapsed in 2003.  In the case of I-795 (also in North Carolina), which was originally planned and built as a US 117 bypass but received the Interstate designation in 2007, it means that the road is not eligible for IM funding and indeed the designation was not pursued for that reason.

[architect77]

Here is toll "warning" signage on some secondary road that is junctioning with NC's new toll road. Sorry for the blurriness:

[NJRoadfan]

I hate that it must be designated as NC540 rather than I-540 (full loop will eventually be I-640/NC640)

I hate that as well. The loop construction got speeded up because the Damn Yankees in Cary got tired of driving 55 to RTP back and forth to work. They wanted their section of the loop built now, so it had to be a toll road which in turn means it can't have an Interstate designation. Which, by the way, I do not understand given that there are Interstate shields on other toll roads in other parts of the country. I have no reason to drive on the loop anyway, but even if I did I will avoid it because 1. I don't want to pay a toll to use it and 2. the difference in the designation between the North and South sides is a glaring embarrassment.

NCDOT's dragging of feet on widening NC-55 is also responsible. Traffic is horrible from the Holly Springs Bypass into Apex since the road goes from divided expressway, to undivided 4-lane arterial with center turn lane to a 2-lane road with center turn lane and then back to 4 lanes just south of US-64. If that section through Apex was widened to 4 lanes, it would go a long way to reducing congestion. The section north of US-64 to RTP is 4 lanes only because Cary financed its construction.

[Kacie Jane]

Here is toll "warning" signage on some secondary road that is junctioning with NC's new toll road. Sorry for the blurriness:

I feel like there's a fairly blatant error on that sign.  I'm assuming the shield on the right is supposed to be for NC/I-540?

[dfilpus]

Here is toll "warning" signage on some secondary road that is junctioning with NC's new toll road. Sorry for the blurriness:

I feel like there's a fairly blatant error on that sign.  I'm assuming the shield on the right is supposed to be for NC/I-540?

Nope. This is for NC 147 Toll northbound at Hopson/Davis Driive, which goes to I 40 and becomes NC 147. What is odd is that signage on NC 147 Toll treats NC 147 (nontoll) as a separate highway. There is even an END NC 147 Toll/ Begin NC 147 sign at the I 40 interchange.

[Janko Dialnice]

Nope. This is for NC 147 Toll northbound at Hopson/Davis Driive, which goes to I 40 and becomes NC 147. What is odd is that signage on NC 147 Toll treats NC 147 (nontoll) as a separate highway. There is even an END NC 147 Toll/ Begin NC 147 sign at the I 40 interchange.

Do any other states do this, treat a partially-tolled highway as two distinct routes?

[vdeane]

PA has separate Turnpike routes for the tolled portion of state highways.  NYSDOT likes to pretend the toll portions of I-90 don't exist on reference markers.

[xcellntbuy]

I believe the same situation exists in Broward County, Florida with FL 869 having specially toll-signed on the Sawgrass Expressway (north/south, despite almost half the road traveling east/west) and NW 10 Street in Deerfield Beach having a regular state map-shield (entirely east/west).  Please correct this information if it is not so.

[jemacedo9]

With the I-376 conversion in PA, it now has a TOLL section in the middle of two free sections.  None of the mainline BGSs treat them as two different routes.  I don't know about any approach signage.

[Kacie Jane]

I feel like there's a fairly blatant error on that sign.  I'm assuming the shield on the right is supposed to be for NC/I-540?

Nope. This is for NC 147 Toll northbound at Hopson/Davis Driive, which goes to I 40 and becomes NC 147. What is odd is that signage on NC 147 Toll treats NC 147 (nontoll) as a separate highway. There is even an END NC 147 Toll/ Begin NC 147 sign at the I 40 interchange.

Thanks for clarifying.  To be honest though, I still just find this odd and confusing.

[1995hoo]

Nope. This is for NC 147 Toll northbound at Hopson/Davis Driive, which goes to I 40 and becomes NC 147. What is odd is that signage on NC 147 Toll treats NC 147 (nontoll) as a separate highway. There is even an END NC 147 Toll/ Begin NC 147 sign at the I 40 interchange.

Do any other states do this, treat a partially-tolled highway as two distinct routes?

I-87 in New York in terms of how exit numbers reset when you leave the Thruway in Albany? Route number isn't distinguished, though.

[NE2]

I believe the same situation exists in Broward County, Florida with FL 869 having specially toll-signed on the Sawgrass Expressway (north/south, despite almost half the road traveling east/west) and NW 10 Street in Deerfield Beach having a regular state map-shield (entirely east/west).  Please correct this information if it is not so.

They do on I-95, but they are of course separate shields: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=26.307996,-80.114622&spn=0.017119,0.033023&gl=us&vpsrc=6&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=26.307851,-80.118768&panoid=1Bskabvd6pV9Yvbqv2SHnA&cbp=12,230.64,,2,-8.14

[vdeane]

Nope. This is for NC 147 Toll northbound at Hopson/Davis Driive, which goes to I 40 and becomes NC 147. What is odd is that signage on NC 147 Toll treats NC 147 (nontoll) as a separate highway. There is even an END NC 147 Toll/ Begin NC 147 sign at the I 40 interchange.

Do any other states do this, treat a partially-tolled highway as two distinct routes?

I-87 in New York in terms of how exit numbers reset when you leave the Thruway in Albany? Route number isn't distinguished, though.

Even though the exit numbers change, the reference markers on the northway treat it as one road.

[machias]

I-87 in New York in terms of how exit numbers reset when you leave the Thruway in Albany? Route number isn't distinguished, though.

Even though the exit numbers change, the reference markers on the northway treat it as one road.

IIRC, I don't think that's entirely true. I know that there is a disparity between the reference markers on the Northway in regards to Region 1 vs Region 7. I can't remember which way it is, but one region's reference markers count the counties up for the entire length of I-87 whereas the other region counts the counties up from the junction with I-90. I'm inclined to think that it's Region 1 that has it wrong, but I don't have notes to back this up but I know for certain that there is a disparity between the two regions.

J.P.

[PAHighways]

With the I-376 conversion in PA, it now has a TOLL section in the middle of two free sections.  None of the mainline BGSs treat them as two different routes.  I don't know about any approach signage.

There are end/begin assemblies where the PennDOT (I-376)/PTC (Turnpike 376) jurisdictions change.

[architect77]

Texas-style posts for NC's first modern toll road. They report that they've sold quadruple the number of transponders as expected.

http://www.wral.com/traffic/video/10556286/#/vid10556286