I was browsing the Oklahoma map in my Rand McNally, following the recent tragic circumstances in the Sooner State, and I noticed an occurrence that I thought was forbidden: a US route (in this case US 412) running on a toll road (Cimarron Turnpike). I recall that there was once a prohibition against tolls on US routes, except for bridges and ferries.
Does anyone else recall such a rule? When was it changed?
If this has been addressed before, forgive me. I couldn't find anything through a search.
The rule is that, for a US route running along a toll road, a toll-free alternative must be made available. For the Cimarron Turnpike, US 64 fulfills this role, as US 412 has a dual designation with US 64 on both sides of the toll section.
US 412 also runs along the Cherokee Turnpike.... the toll-free alternative is designated as US 412 Alternate.
I thought this was discussed somewhere with the case of US 51 going onto the NW Tollway in the Rockford, IL area?
I know we've discussed it before. Did anyone ever provide an actual reference to such a rule?
AASHTO policy: http://www.maine.gov/mdot/csd/mts/usroutedesignation.htm
QuoteAny toll highway facility may be included in the U.S. Numbered System when it meets all the criteria for inclusion, and when the request for the marking originates with the official authority having jurisdiction over the toll facility and the request is directed to AASHTO and supported by the appropriate Member Department. The word "Toll" shall appear over the official U.S. Route Marker and a toll-free routing between the same termini shall continue to be retained and marked as part of the U.S. Numbered System.
Technically, none of them meet the criteria (they're not bannered 'toll'). Practically, US 51 still fails, since the alternate is IL 251.
What does one consider an alternative? A road that parallels a toll road within a few hundred feet, for a few hundred miles?
Would business route US 90 in New Orleans count? It's a toll over the MS River. Another bridge is a bit of a distance away on US 90.
Quote from: golden eagle on June 02, 2013, 09:24:45 AM
Would business route US 90 in New Orleans count? It's a toll over the MS River. Another bridge is a bit of a distance away on US 90.
No. Toll crossings have always been part of the system.
Though they were discouraged on the mainline if a free alternate was available: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/highwayhistory/us82.cfm
QuoteAASHO added the reference to privately owned toll bridges because the owners of such bridges had been badgering the Executive Committee of AASHO to add U.S. numbered roads to feed traffic to their privately owned bridges. AASHO had been repulsing such efforts for several years.
Thanks for the answers. I was surprised to see US routes on toll roads. Now I know.
What about short duplexes? While it's not a toll road now, most of I-95 in Connecticut was until the 1980s. I-95 and US Route 1 run together over the Connecticut River between Old Saybrook and Old Lyme:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAnqi141.jpg&hash=9753825a7a2ec344d294df51bb9abc00e583494d)
Picture is from Memorial Day weekend of 2010.
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on June 02, 2013, 03:00:54 PM
What about short duplexes? While it's not a toll road now, most of I-95 in Connecticut was until the 1980s. I-95 and US Route 1 run together over the Connecticut River between Old Saybrook and Old Lyme:
That was a toll bridge, and predated the turnpike (1948).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Baldwin_Bridge
US 64/169 briefly duplex with a free section of the Creek Turnpike in south Tulsa.
412 is a special case. I don't think of it as an ordinary US route, but as a "super" US highway that sometimes follows toll roads.
FWIW, Alternate US 412 paralleling the Cherokee Turnpike was Scenic US 412 up until a few months ago. Before that it was OK 33 and before that OK 11.
US 9 on the Garden State Parkway. US 3 on the Everett Turnpike. US 13 on DE 1 Toll Road.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 02, 2013, 11:17:20 PM
US 9 on the Garden State Parkway. US 3 on the Everett Turnpike. US 13 on DE 1 Toll Road.
Doesn't US 3 duck off the Everett Turnpike for its old surface alignment, leaving the Turnpike without any route number in the tolled area? You can use the US 3 part of the Everett for free. (Same for US 4 and the Spaulding...US 4 leaves just before a toll. US 202 joins and exits without a toll at the other end as well.) I think US 13 joins and exits DE 1 without a toll being necessary as well.
US 9 is only tolled across the Great Egg Harbor Bay, as the former crossing of US 9: The Beeslys Point Bridge was a toll bridge, and will not be reopening ever again.
I believe the exception was made, because the mainline Parkway toll acts like a defacto toll bridge, rather than US 9 aligned on a toll road.
Also, US 9 at New Gretna and Toms River are on free sections of the roadway.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 02, 2013, 11:17:20 PM
US 9 on the Garden State Parkway.
Just a bridge. As mentioned above US 9 has always used a toll bridge in the past, and bridges are an exception anywa.
QuoteUS 3 on the Everett Turnpike.
The Everett Turnpike is unnumbered, except for the northern end which is I-93/293, and the southern few miles that bypass Nashua, which, while signed as both US 3 and the Everett Turnpike, are untolled.
QuoteUS 13 on DE 1 Toll Road.
DE 1 is a bypass of US 13. The only place where they overlap is southwest of New Castle, where between two exits DE 1 was built on top of old US 13. This stretch is untolled.
I think the US 169/ Broadway Bridge in Kansas City was tolled at one time. So was the old US 82 bridge over the Mississippi River between Greenville, MS and Lake Village, AR. Ditto the US 49 bridge at Helena-West Helena, AR.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 02, 2013, 11:17:20 PM
US 9 on the Garden State Parkway.
None of the 3 brief segments of the GSP with US 9 on it has a toll booth...
Mapmikey
Quote from: Mapmikey on June 03, 2013, 06:30:14 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 02, 2013, 11:17:20 PM
US 9 on the Garden State Parkway.
None of the 3 brief segments of the GSP with US 9 on it has a toll booth...
Mapmikey
As previously discussed: South of Ocean City, US 9 had a toll booth on a bridge. That bridge is now closed. US 9 now uses the GSP, and still has a toll southbound. Northbound is untolled.
Since the 1974(?) rerouting, US 1 in Boston crosses the Tobin Bridge, which is a toll facility (southbound only). While MA 16 west to I-93 south is a toll-free alternative for southbound traffic, it is a) not a US route, b) is a very indirect alternate route, and c) commercial vehicles are restricted on part of MA 16.
Quote from: roadman on June 03, 2013, 02:23:47 PM
Since the 1974(?) rerouting, US 1 in Boston crosses the Tobin Bridge, which is a toll facility (southbound only). While MA 16 west to I-93 south is a toll-free alternative for southbound traffic, it is a) not a US route, b) is a very indirect alternate route, and c) commercial vehicles are restricted on part of MA 16.
The alternate route here is probably 95/93.
Quote from: roadman on June 03, 2013, 02:23:47 PM
Since the 1974(?) rerouting, US 1 in Boston crosses the Tobin Bridge, which is a toll facility (southbound only). While MA 16 west to I-93 south is a toll-free alternative for southbound traffic, it is a) not a US route, b) is a very indirect alternate route, and c) commercial vehicles are restricted on part of MA 16.
To add, one-way tolls for the Tobin and the tunnels (Sumner & Callahan) didn't happen until about 1983; so between 1971 & 1983,
both directions for US 1 in Boston involved a tolled crossing. From 1971-1974/5; US 1 was routed via the Sumner & Callahan Tunnels.
Prior to 1971, US 1 had no tolled crossings in Boston; the tunnels were originally designated as Route C1.
Toll crossings are exceptions. Otherwise, what's the toll-free alternate for US 1 & 9 over the George Washington Bridge?
Quote from: Kacie Jane on June 03, 2013, 02:51:25 PM
Toll crossings are exceptions. Otherwise, what's the toll-free alternate for US 1 & 9 over the George Washington Bridge?
9W :bigass:
Fair enough, I suppose that works for one of the two. :P
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 03, 2013, 01:34:25 AMDE 1 is a bypass of US 13. The only place where they overlap is southwest of New Castle, where between two exits DE 1 was built on top of old US 13. This stretch is untolled.
The new US 301 in Delaware will be tolled.
Quote from: NE2 on June 03, 2013, 03:56:19 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on June 03, 2013, 02:51:25 PM
Toll crossings are exceptions. Otherwise, what's the toll-free alternate for US 1 & 9 over the George Washington Bridge?
9W :bigass:
Ok, smart guy, what about the alternate for MD US 40 over the Hatem Bridge?
Quote from: kj3400 on June 03, 2013, 06:23:08 PM
what about the alternate for MD US 40 over the Hatem Bridge?
US 1 along the Conowingo Dam.
Wasn't the old Denver-Boulder Turnpike (when it was tolled) also US 36 for its full length?
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on June 03, 2013, 08:24:51 PM
Wasn't the old Denver-Boulder Turnpike (when it was tolled) also US 36 for its full length?
Not until after tolls were removed.
Several of the Chicago-area toll roads were toll-bannered alternate routes. There were also such on 80 in Georgia and 98 in Florida (both due to toll bridges).
http://www.us-highways.com/tollus.htm
I forgot about US 278 on Hilton Head Island, where 278 Biz is the free route.
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 03, 2013, 06:31:39 PM
US 1 along the Conowingo Dam.
Don't forget U.S. 50/U.S. 301 across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge ("WPL"); U.S. 301 over the Gov.Harry Nice Bridge at the Potomac River; and the U.S. 13 across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 04, 2013, 07:14:36 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 03, 2013, 06:31:39 PM
US 1 along the Conowingo Dam.
Don't forget U.S. 50/U.S. 301 across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge ("WPL"); U.S. 301 over the Gov.Harry Nice Bridge at the Potomac River; and the U.S. 13 across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel.
Which are all bridges, and not subject to the free alternative restrictions.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2013, 08:23:29 AMWhich are all bridges, and not subject to the free alternative restrictions.
I'm becoming more and more certain that no matter how many times this is stated, it will continue to be ignored.
US 34 across Rocky Mountain National Park. Maybe?
Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2013, 03:05:12 PM
US 34 across Rocky Mountain National Park. Maybe?
Would that not fall under the same idea as the US highways through Yellowstone with the fee booths, or is the mileage even counted toward the length of the highway?
Yellowstone is officially a gap (and the routes are not signed). 34 and 36 are signed in RMNP: http://www.usends.com/30-39/036/036.html
(So actually 36 also has a park entrance fee.)
Anyone know if US 26 has a fee through Grand Teton?
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 03, 2013, 06:31:39 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on June 03, 2013, 06:23:08 PM
what about the alternate for MD US 40 over the Hatem Bridge?
US 1 along the Conowingo Dam.
Oh. I actually didn't consider US 1 as a free alternative, as it goes pretty far north.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on June 04, 2013, 02:21:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2013, 08:23:29 AMWhich are all bridges, and not subject to the free alternative restrictions.
I'm becoming more and more certain that no matter how many times this is stated, it will continue to be ignored.
I knew that, I was just being hypothetical.
Back before the WV section of the Mon-Fayette opened, there were organizations in both states that wanted to re-route US-119 to the highway. Obviously, that didn't happen (though I thought it was a good idea)
From the discussion on page 2 of this thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1409.25 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1409.25)
Quote from: NE2 on June 04, 2013, 04:06:46 PM
Anyone know if US 26 has a fee through Grand Teton?
If you stay on 26 through the park, there is no entrance fee. However, if you follow 89/191/287 north of 26, you will immediately encounter the park entrance booth and lighten your wallet.
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
Quote from: ski-man on June 05, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
183A is not a US Route. It is a private toll road owned by the CTRMA.
Quote from: kphoger on June 05, 2013, 05:11:07 PM
Quote from: ski-man on June 05, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
183A is not a US Route. It is a private toll road owned by the CTRMA.
For clarification, 183A Turnpike is a public toll road owned by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority. In Texas, a regional mobility authority, just like a regional tollway authority (NTTA), is a political subdivision of the state - the same as a city, county, school district, or other taxing district. RMAs and RTAs are different in that they have no taxing power; they provide an essential government service in exchange for direct payments from users. Each has a board of directors appointed by elected officials.
Quote from: wxfree on June 05, 2013, 07:16:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 05, 2013, 05:11:07 PM
Quote from: ski-man on June 05, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
183A is not a US Route. It is a private toll road owned by the CTRMA.
For clarification, 183A Turnpike is a public toll road owned by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority. In Texas, a regional mobility authority, just like a regional tollway authority (NTTA), is a political subdivision of the state - the same as a city, county, school district, or other taxing district. RMAs and RTAs are different in that they have no taxing power; they provide an essential government service in exchange for direct payments from users. Each has a board of directors appointed by elected officials.
That still doesn't make it a US route.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 06, 2013, 12:12:03 AM
Quote from: wxfree on June 05, 2013, 07:16:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 05, 2013, 05:11:07 PM
Quote from: ski-man on June 05, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
183A is not a US Route. It is a private toll road owned by the CTRMA.
For clarification, 183A Turnpike is a public toll road owned by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority. In Texas, a regional mobility authority, just like a regional tollway authority (NTTA), is a political subdivision of the state - the same as a city, county, school district, or other taxing district. RMAs and RTAs are different in that they have no taxing power; they provide an essential government service in exchange for direct payments from users. Each has a board of directors appointed by elected officials.
That still doesn't make it a US route.
No, it is not a US route or any form of state highway. When TxDOT was considering developing the road, it was referred to as US 183A in planning documents. When the RMA took over, it was no longer considered part of the TxDOT system.
It bothers me to hear or read people referring to Texas toll authorities as private companies or as semi-governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. Newspapers, and even TxDOT, have done that. I have no better option than to ignore it most of the time, but on a road enthusiast forum, it's more appropriate to point out such technicalities. It is a public toll road, but not any kind of state highway. I assume the name is meant to let people know it's a bypass to US 183.
Quote from: wxfree on June 06, 2013, 12:54:20 AM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 06, 2013, 12:12:03 AM
Quote from: wxfree on June 05, 2013, 07:16:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 05, 2013, 05:11:07 PM
Quote from: ski-man on June 05, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
US 183A outside of Austin is tolled, but there is still the old US 183 that is not tolled.
183A is not a US Route. It is a private toll road owned by the CTRMA.
For clarification, 183A Turnpike is a public toll road owned by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority. In Texas, a regional mobility authority, just like a regional tollway authority (NTTA), is a political subdivision of the state - the same as a city, county, school district, or other taxing district. RMAs and RTAs are different in that they have no taxing power; they provide an essential government service in exchange for direct payments from users. Each has a board of directors appointed by elected officials.
That still doesn't make it a US route.
It bothers me to hear or read people referring to Texas toll authorities as private companies or as semi-governmental or quasi-governmental agencies
That is,
deathtopumpkins, what he was correcting me on. I erroneously touted the agency as a private entity, which it is not.
However,
wxfree, if the CTRMA is a subdivision of the state, should we still call it a state highway–even if it's not part of TxDOT? If not, then what
do we call it?
It's no more a state highway than a prison driveway.
Quote from: wxfree on June 06, 2013, 12:54:20 AMNo, it is not a US route or any form of state highway. When TxDOT was considering developing the road, it was referred to as US 183A in planning documents. When the RMA took over, it was no longer considered part of the TxDOT system.
I am not sure that is actually true. My understanding is that roads in Texas developed and maintained by public toll agencies (including RMAs and RTAs, TxDOT's turnpike division, etc.
but not private toll companies such as the developer of the former Camino Colombia toll road) are formally classified as state highways, even though TxDOT in most cases either has no direct responsibility for construction or maintenance, or has farmed it out to a private company through a CDA. The underlying rationale for this policy is to facilitate reversion to TxDOT in the event the agency runs into financial trouble and also to give TxDOT leverage to enforce its engineering standards.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 06, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
Camino Colombia toll road ... financial trouble
Yep! :nod:
(By the way, it's
still the Camino Colombia Toll Road; it's just
also state highway 255 now. See below.)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FTX_hwy_9.png&hash=a315e02f194976449c14173a71dea6bf0111cf0c)
Quote from: kphoger on June 06, 2013, 10:57:42 AM
However, wxfree, if the CTRMA is a subdivision of the state, should we still call it a state highway–even if it's not part of TxDOT? If not, then what do we call it?
A political subdivision is the same thing as a city, county, school district, hospital district, utility district, etc. RTAs and RMAs could be thought of as special utility districts. They could also be compared with counties, the difference being that they have no taxing power, are limited to mobility projects, and have jurisdiction only over the projects that own or operate.
TxDOT is a part of state government; therefore, their roads are state highways. RMA projects are more like city streets and county roads; they're roads of a political subdivision, not of the state itself.
The previous statement is an assumption, true unless modified. I've read that RMAs can run state highway toll roads with cooperation of TxDOT. I have yet to find exactly how that works. I think Cameron County RMA runs SH 550. I have not found and read the agreement between them and TxDOT so as to see how that works. I have looked over the agreement with NTTA about SH 121, and it specifies that the main lanes are removed from the state highway system while the frontage roads are SH 121 and owned by TxDOT. I have not only an interest in roads, but also in law, so these arrangements are of double interest to me.
What about the PGBT? TxDOT had it on the books at one point as SH 190 and in fact the present PGBT/DNT stack was originally built as a TxDOT project, but now both the PGBT and DNT mainlanes are under NTTA jurisdiction.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 06, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: wxfree on June 06, 2013, 12:54:20 AMNo, it is not a US route or any form of state highway. When TxDOT was considering developing the road, it was referred to as US 183A in planning documents. When the RMA took over, it was no longer considered part of the TxDOT system.
I am not sure that is actually true. My understanding is that roads in Texas developed and maintained by public toll agencies (including RMAs and RTAs, TxDOT's turnpike division, etc. but not private toll companies such as the developer of the former Camino Colombia toll road) are formally classified as state highways, even though TxDOT in most cases either has no direct responsibility for construction or maintenance, or has farmed it out to a private company through a CDA. The underlying rationale for this policy is to facilitate reversion to TxDOT in the event the agency runs into financial trouble and also to give TxDOT leverage to enforce its engineering standards.
That's mostly true, except for the part about the roads being state highways. CTRMA's 290E, Sam Rayburn Tollway, and parts of the Bush Turnpike were built in TxDOT right-of-way after they built the frontage roads, which (except for the case of portions of the Bush Turnpike) continue to exist as state highways. This is done by agreement with TxDOT. The main lanes are removed from the state highway system, since they're being operated by a political subdivision rather than a state agency. The 121 (Rayburn) agreement states:
Quote[T]he Segment's main lanes and associated right-of-way shall be removed from the state highway system and transferred to the Authority as more specifically set forth in the following paragraph and pursuant to multiple agreements for the lease, sale, or conveyance of a toll project or system under Subchapter D (the "Transfer Agreements" ). The frontage roads will not be transferred and shall remain on the state highway system.
What you describe is mostly true about TxDOT toll projects being transferred to other toll authorities. TxDOT has agreements to enforce its standards, and in the case of the Rayburn Tollway, the project will revert to TxDOT after approximately 50 years. Recent legislation requires that new transfers to regional authorities be permanent, so there will be no more of those arrangements, unless the law is changed again.
Toll roads on which the main lanes are state highways are run by TxDOT's Toll Operations Division or by CDA. I think CCRMA's current toll road is actually SH 550, making it an exception. I'd like to learn more about that arrangement.
I really didn't mean to derail this topic. I'll incorporate the next question here so as to minimize the effect.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 06, 2013, 02:34:16 PM
What about the PGBT? TxDOT had it on the books at one point as SH 190 and in fact the present PGBT/DNT stack was originally built as a TxDOT project, but now both the PGBT and DNT mainlanes are under NTTA jurisdiction.
I have not read the Bush Turnpike agreement. TxDOT's statewide planning map does not show any portion of SH 161 or 190 along the turnpike as a state highway, although along the western extension (I-20 to 183) the frontage roads are signed as SH 161 with the non-toll black-and-white signs. I don't know the technicalities of that arrangement. Those documents were not as easy to find as the ones for the 121 Rayburn project (not that I've looked all that much just yet). NTTA does make a point of saying that its toll roads are not part of the state highway system. DNT is the only long road project on the NTTA system that never was a TxDOT project; it was developed independently by the Texas Turnpike Authority (back before it was abolished and the name used for a new TxDOT division [recently renamed the Toll Operations Division]) and NTTA.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 06, 2013, 02:34:16 PM
What about the PGBT?
I actually had to look that one up. Here I thought you were just making a joke by calling it the Papa George Bush Turnpike.
It's pronounced pig butt.
Wxfree--many thanks for the analysis addressing whether toll roads owned or operated by regional authorities are in fact part of the state highway system in Texas.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 06, 2013, 04:00:05 PMI actually had to look that one up. Here I thought you were just making a joke by calling it the Papa George Bush Turnpike.
It's kind of funny, isn't it. Long ago I got a copy of the construction plans for the IH 35E/PGBT stack, which was built as a TxDOT project and was in progress when I visited Dallas in 2003. At that time the turnpike was identified on advance guide and interchange sequence signs as "President George Bush Turnpike," i.e., the name spelled out in full. It turned out that in the original construction plans, TxDOT had called for it to be given a black-on-white rectangular shield (similar to that used on guide signs for various types of state highway) with "PGBT" as the route designation, similar to "OSR" for the Old San Antonio Road.
In the years since, the PGBT has played a starring role in NTTA's game of musical chairs for trailblazers. At first (certainly by 2004) NTTA had a square trailblazer for this highway consisting of the full name (all-uppercase letters) below a waving Stars and Stripes design. This was used in independent-mount locations only, not on guide signs, where the name was spelled out in full instead, using full-size letters. This was when the DNT had a circular trailblazer, the Mountain Creek Lake toll bridge had an upside-down pentagon trailblazer, etc. Later, in 2008, NTTA decided that all of its facilities should have a common trailblazer design (24" x 36", oblong vertically), with the only variation being the facility name, again spelled out in full. I believe these signs were used only in independent-mount locations--for guide signs NTTA pursued several strategies, ranging from spelling out the name in full ("Sam Rayburn Tollway," e.g.) to using the generic TxDOT state toll marker for toll roads which were still associated with a numbered TxDOT route (for example, plans called at one time for the SRT to get SH 121 Toll shields on overhead signs).
I have now fallen somewhat out of touch with NTTA trailblazer replacements (!), but I understand the current signing strategy is built around using an adaptation of the generic TxDOT state toll marker, only with the digits replaced by the route abbreviation (SRT, PGBT, DNT, etc.) in Clearview, and the stylized state-flag-and-"TOLL" design on the bottom replaced with NTTA's own circle-T "TOLL" logo. These shields are used on guide signs, and the facility name is also spelled out in full, so the result is a belt-and-braces solution. I don't know if these new shields are also used in independent-mount locations.
Quote from: US71 on June 03, 2013, 04:17:21 AM
I think the US 169/ Broadway Bridge in Kansas City was tolled at one time.
It was...until 1991.
Quote from: builder_J on June 17, 2013, 03:04:49 AM
Quote from: US71 on June 03, 2013, 04:17:21 AM
I think the US 169/ Broadway Bridge in Kansas City was tolled at one time.
It was...until 1991.
The Broadway Bridge did not receive the US 169 designation until after the tolls were removed. Prior to 1991, 169 used the Fairfax/Platte Purchase bridges (though, the Platte Purchase bridge was also a toll bridge at one time)
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 06, 2013, 06:42:51 PM
Wxfree--many thanks for the analysis addressing whether toll roads owned or operated by regional authorities are in fact part of the state highway system in Texas.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 06, 2013, 04:00:05 PMI actually had to look that one up. Here I thought you were just making a joke by calling it the Papa George Bush Turnpike.
It's kind of funny, isn't it. Long ago I got a copy of the construction plans for the IH 35E/PGBT stack, which was built as a TxDOT project and was in progress when I visited Dallas in 2003. At that time the turnpike was identified on advance guide and interchange sequence signs as "President George Bush Turnpike," i.e., the name spelled out in full. It turned out that in the original construction plans, TxDOT had called for it to be given a black-on-white rectangular shield (similar to that used on guide signs for various types of state highway) with "PGBT" as the route designation, similar to "OSR" for the Old San Antonio Road.
In the years since, the PGBT has played a starring role in NTTA's game of musical chairs for trailblazers. At first (certainly by 2004) NTTA had a square trailblazer for this highway consisting of the full name (all-uppercase letters) below a waving Stars and Stripes design. This was used in independent-mount locations only, not on guide signs, where the name was spelled out in full instead, using full-size letters. This was when the DNT had a circular trailblazer, the Mountain Creek Lake toll bridge had an upside-down pentagon trailblazer, etc. Later, in 2008, NTTA decided that all of its facilities should have a common trailblazer design (24" x 36", oblong vertically), with the only variation being the facility name, again spelled out in full. I believe these signs were used only in independent-mount locations--for guide signs NTTA pursued several strategies, ranging from spelling out the name in full ("Sam Rayburn Tollway," e.g.) to using the generic TxDOT state toll marker for toll roads which were still associated with a numbered TxDOT route (for example, plans called at one time for the SRT to get SH 121 Toll shields on overhead signs).
I have now fallen somewhat out of touch with NTTA trailblazer replacements (!), but I understand the current signing strategy is built around using an adaptation of the generic TxDOT state toll marker, only with the digits replaced by the route abbreviation (SRT, PGBT, DNT, etc.) in Clearview, and the stylized state-flag-and-"TOLL" design on the bottom replaced with NTTA's own circle-T "TOLL" logo. These shields are used on guide signs, and the facility name is also spelled out in full, so the result is a belt-and-braces solution. I don't know if these new shields are also used in independent-mount locations.
Yes, most of them are the blue signs with different words or letters inside. Dallas North Tollway is still a mix. On the newest section from 121 north to US 380 it's a combination of newer blue signs with the older green D signs. I think the only place a DNT logo is on a BGS is on the 121 Toll/Sam Rayburn Tollway. All other major interchanges (I-35E downtown, I-635, PGBT) just write the name out with no logo.
Toll 121 and SRT (both blue signs) are really used interchangeably IIRC, but someone correct me if I'm wrong. I know I remember SRT signage on BGS's at the beginning of the tollway leaving Grapevine and entering Lewisville/Coppell. On southbound Dallas North Tollway, the exit says 121 Toll, but at the split for NB and SB stack, I think the logos say SRT.