AARoads Forum

So thinking about the whole I-81 situation in NY, it occurred to me that my perceptions regarding how one should be able to interact with the interstate system have been shaped by where I live - a lot.  I've spent my whole life in upstate NY - a state whose interstate connectivity to the rest of the state is pretty good, to the point where "NY's interstate system" feels like a logical and comprehensive system in and of itself (with only a couple significant gaps, the most notable of which is future I-86), something which isn't the case with many other states.  I also grew up in a part of the Rochester area with very good highway access, to the point where the route to most places was entirely "expressway" as we call freeways here, with the exception of the "last mile" on either end.  And now, living in the Capital District, not only am I still able to do that, I can get to most other parts of the country entirely on interstates/freeways without going out of my way (interstates only, if one makes an exception for the NJ Turnpike), with the only exceptions being Vermont, Rhode Island, and the parts of the country that aren't on the interstate system to begin with.

I'm pretty spoiled in that respect, and it occurred to me that I only really got as dead-set on that mindset when I moved to the Capital District.  In the past, I grew up in Rochester, spent college in Potsdam, had an internship in Sidney, and spent a year in Rome (all in upstate NY), none of which lend themselves to that mindset (most of which doesn't even lend themselves to the mindset regarding local trips on freeways).  The "one should use the freeway system as the backbone of all local trips" mindset was something I had growing up, lost in college, and only regained upon moving to the Capital District.  The "one should use the interstate system as the backbone of all trips" mindset only developed upon moving here (Rochester has always had significant gaps, though they're presently all in PA/MD and won't be NY's problem until the business loop designation in Syracuse).

So how has everyone else's perceptions of how the transportation system should be like been shaped by where you live?

I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

True expressways are special to me as they don't really exist in the Northeast.

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 25, 2021, 12:35:07 PM
I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

Well, VA 10 is there and is more lightly trafficked, although you run the risk of getting stuck behind a tractor doing 12 MPH in the middle of Surry County and be unable to pass it because of how wide it is. (Speaking from experience here.)

Everyone in Michigan thinks that they have the worst roads in the country based off how they were two decades ago.  Nowadays I would argue Michigan isn't even in the bottom third of states with bad highways. 

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 25, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Everyone in Michigan thinks that they have the worst roads in the country based off how they were two decades ago.  Nowadays I would argue Michigan isn't even in the bottom third of states with bad highways. 

Yeah, when I went through Michigan in 2012 I didn't notice any particularly bad road conditions as an outsider.

I think most people tend to think their state's roads are relatively worse than they actually are because of confirmation bias and because they spend more time on local roads finding issues than they do in other states. Or worse, they just assume other states' roads are immaculate because they've never actually been there.

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 25, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Everyone in Michigan thinks that they have the worst roads in the country based off how they were two decades ago.  Nowadays I would argue Michigan isn't even in the bottom third of states with bad highways. 

Michiganders have, from what I've seen, very high standards for roads, at least as far as MDOT is concerned.  My relatives ask me how much I like their bad roads, and I have to respond that they're actually pretty good, and that MDOT usually has enough capacity for the traffic they carry (I-94 notwithstanding).  I tell them that this is in contrast to Illinois, where a decent freeway (IDOT) seems to have splitting seams and enough patches to basically repave the freeway piecemeal, as well as a complete lack of capacity.

As for perceptions, I live near Chicago and have been back and forth to Detroit very often (well enough to know both cities well). I view IDOT as very insular and fairly unwilling to try new ideas for better traffic flow as compared to MDOT.  IDOT could very well use the Michigan Left in several places around the area - IL-59, IL83, IL-56, IL-64, and 75th Street (DuPage County), but instead, sticks to an older model of left turn signals.  IDOT could add capacity, as ISTHA has.  In fact, I often wonder why IDOT doesn't just learn from ISHTA and follow them.  Somehow, ISHTA can build a smooth road and have flowing traffic that seems to elude IDOT.  But, the main problem I see here is a lack of planing for the future.  Everything is for the moment, and everyone asks "where's mine?" instead of planning ahead and even working together as a region.

INDOT's plan on adding J-Turns on US 30 and 31 corridors was a band-aid approach to making those roads an expressway, but no, the people who drive or live on those corridors want a freeway upgrade that INDOT doesn't have the money to do since it would cost $1 billion+ to upgrade.

Growing up we only had mostly rural two lane roads. The interstate was fancy and went to long distance places. And had exit ramps  that dropped you at either a traffic light or stop sign. That was my worldview for a long time. There was one full cloverleaf in my area at I 55 and US 98 and that was a big deal to everyone. The one at I 55 and I 12 was a bottleneck but seemed perfectly acceptable.
Even after I went to LSU, I was used to standard diamond interchanges, the occasional cloverleaf at major routes, and anything different was unusual and intriguing. The stacks at I 110 and US 61/US 190, I 310 and US 61, all of the exits on I 310, everything in downtown Br and Nola, especially left exits were just mind blowing.
Now, after living in driving in Texas for so long, I definitely see how my perspective on things have changed. The very few times I've had to leave the state to go back to Louisiana or Mississippi, I think about or comment about how weird it is to not see frontage roads, and to have exit ramps that aren't easy slip ramps off and on. I find it odd when in a city and the US highway is 2 or 4 lanes with tons of traffic lights and not either a full freeway or at least partially controlled expressway. And that there are fewer freeways in the bigger cities. That there are only like 2 state highways that are freeways, or that there's only one type or state highway. Like in Louisiana there are tons or numbered state highways that wouldn't be in many other states. But in Mississippi there are so few state highways. Some of the roads where I grew up would be FM roads in Texas. Or loops or spurs.
It's also odd to see major interchanges with diamonds or parclos. And especially to not see at least a partial stack at every freeway-freeway junction. Or even just one direct connector.

Example: if Baton Rouge were in Texas, US 61 would be a freeway. Probably all the way to New Orleans, US 190 probably would be too, or would be like US 90 Alternate. There would be a full loop, or at least one to the north. It might be a full 410 loop, or a state highway loop, possibly with some freeway and some non freeway sections like Loop 1604 in San Antonio. There'd be an I 10 bridge, a US 190 bridge, a bridge to the south, toll express lanes on I 12, and probably I 10 from LSU to Gonzales, and LA 1 would be a toll road from port Allen to Donaldsonville. There'd be a full stack at every major junction, including I 12 and I 55, and several more exits in denham springs and walker.

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 25, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Everyone in Michigan thinks that they have the worst roads in the country based off how they were two decades ago.  Nowadays I would argue Michigan isn't even in the bottom third of states with bad highways. 

I used to think the same thing about Louisiana's roads, especially interstates and major US highways. I remember when I 55 was in atrocious shape, and everywhere that needed at least three lanes each direction on I 10 and I 12 had only two and were always thick and full of slowdowns and bottlenecks. Especially after moving to Texas, when I went back for any reason I still thought this.

Now, having been through recently, I was impressed at how much its improved. Six lanes practically from the Texas state line to Kinder on I 10, finally widened to six lanes from 10-12 split to prairieville, I 12 has six lanes almost all the way to Livingston. And I 55 has been repaved and redone and is in much better shape. They've repaired and repaved alot  of I 10 and I 12 too.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 25, 2021, 12:47:20 PM
True expressways are special to me as they don't really exist in the Northeast.

What?  New Jersey and Pennsylvania have tons of them.

Quote from: stridentweasel on July 25, 2021, 04:53:11 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 25, 2021, 12:47:20 PM
True expressways are special to me as they don't really exist in the Northeast.

What?  New Jersey and Pennsylvania have tons of them.

I guess I meant New England.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 25, 2021, 02:55:38 PM

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 25, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Everyone in Michigan thinks that they have the worst roads in the country based off how they were two decades ago.  Nowadays I would argue Michigan isn't even in the bottom third of states with bad highways. 

Yeah, when I went through Michigan in 2012 I didn't notice any particularly bad road conditions as an outsider.

I think most people tend to think their state's roads are relatively worse than they actually are because of confirmation bias and because they spend more time on local roads finding issues than they do in other states. Or worse, they just assume other states' roads are immaculate because they've never actually been there.

Don't get me wrong there definitely is a reason the "Pure Potholes"  meme took root in the first place.  But after that happened the state took fixing it's major roads very seriously and the meme doesn't really fit anymore.  The surface highway designs in Michigan I would argue are often among the best in the country. 

Because of where I have lived in Missouri (first Columbia and now Kansas City), I've often thought of St. Louis as being the Gateway to the East rather than the Gateway to the West - for the simple reason that whenever we headed on trips out east from where we were, getting to our destination necessarily involved going through the St. Louis area in some fashion.

In addition, I've always thought that St. Louis has a stronger cultural and architectural connection with historic East Coast cities such as Boston and Philadelphia (such as, for example, a greater proportion of brick houses) than do most Midwestern cities of comparable size - no doubt because St. Louis is one of the oldest cities in its part of the country.

Quote from: KCRoadFan on July 25, 2021, 07:57:35 PM
Because of where I have lived in Missouri (first Columbia and now Kansas City), I've often thought of St. Louis as being the Gateway to the East rather than the Gateway to the West - for the simple reason that whenever we headed on trips out east from where we were, getting to our destination necessarily involved going through the St. Louis area in some fashion.

In addition, I've always thought that St. Louis has a stronger cultural and architectural connection with historic East Coast cities such as Boston and Philadelphia (such as, for example, a greater proportion of brick houses) than do most Midwestern cities of comparable size - no doubt because St. Louis is one of the oldest cities in its part of the country.

I remember reading somewhere that St Louis is the westernmost Eastern city and Kansas City is the easternmost Western city. I think I might dispute the specifics there a little bit (Chicago feels a lot more like Kansas City than it does St Louis) but I can definitely see where that's coming from.

I didn't know that the vast majority of the country uses numbered, not lettered, county routes until like 5 years ago.

Due to Wisconsin's tendency to build many stack interchanges and avoid cloverleafs I'm always surprised to see how few stack interchanges and how many cloverleafs there are in cities that are larger than any we have in WI. Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul most notably.

I can't imagine what a Texas native thinks about other states' freeway interchanges when they see them for the first time.

Quote from: thspfc on July 25, 2021, 10:58:07 PM
I didn't know that the vast majority of the country uses numbered, not lettered, county routes until like 5 years ago.

Hell, as an Oklahoman, county routes in general are an entirely foreign concept. Even in the adjoining states, there's only a few counties that use them.

Perceptions as a kid

I grew up in the rural exurbs of the Twin Cities on a dirt road, so I figured most places had dirt roads just outside of town.

I thought suffixed interstates were in every big city.

I thought interstates were the only roads you would take to get to another state unless where you were going was right near the border.

Perceptions as an adult in Colorado

States like Louisiana and Kentucky are super odd to me that have state highways every six feet or so, since Colorado doesn't have a ton of state highways that don't connect different towns.

It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

Toll roads are dumb, since E-470 and the Northwest Parkway serve a very niche market here.

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

They're still on the system though.  Colorado Springs and Grand Junction aren't connected by one interstate, but you can get there the quickest way via interstate.  I was thinking more the Nashua, NH; Lynchburg, VA; Fresno, CA; Bend, OR's of the world.

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 11:09:48 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

They're still on the system though.  Colorado Springs and Grand Junction aren't connected by one interstate, but you can get there the quickest way via interstate.  I was thinking more the Nashua, NH; Lynchburg, VA; Fresno, CA; Bend, OR's of the world.

Chris

I get it. So something like Bloomington, IN before I-69.

Colorado has tons of areas off the interstate.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 26, 2021, 11:22:13 AM
Colorado has tons of areas off the interstate.

Colorado's top ten cities are all on the interstate system. 

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2021, 11:40:48 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 26, 2021, 11:22:13 AM
Colorado has tons of areas off the interstate.

Colorado's top ten cities are all on the interstate system.

True, but a lot of the Southwest part of the state there are no interstates for hundreds of miles.

Milwaukee and Chicago are the big cities that I go to the most. Both those cities have long stretches of suburbia along their main freeway approach from the west (about 30 miles for Milwaukee along I-94, and about 45 miles for Chicago along I-90). This is due to the fact that west is one of the only directions those metro areas can continue to sprawl, as they have Lake Michigan to the east and all of the land between the two cities is pretty much developed. For that reason I thought that all major cities have similarly long stretches of suburbs, but that's not the case.

Washington's logical and consistent numbering system, good signage, and generally decent road quality all has me spoiled. Compared to the mess next door in Oregon, it's far easier to naturally follow routes to clinch and to research them in general.

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 25, 2021, 12:35:07 PM
I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

This is a good point, the Hampton Roads/Tidewater region is one of the most heavily populated areas that I can think of that's so poorly served by the Interstate highway system. Essentially, it's I-64 and not a lot else. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel gives you (expensive) access northward, but via US 13 which is not a freeway for the most part. It's a long haul to Wilmington, DE on that one. And routes to and through neighboring NC are 1950's style arterials, though that is slated to change eventually.

All this aside, the Hampton Roads metro is a top 40 market (population wise) but it's at a dead end on our IH system.

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 11:09:48 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

They're still on the system though.  Colorado Springs and Grand Junction aren't connected by one interstate, but you can get there the quickest way via interstate.  I was thinking more the Nashua, NH; Lynchburg, VA; Fresno, CA; Bend, OR's of the world.

Chris

While they're both on the system, the most direct/quickest route is actually US 23/OH 15/US 68/I-75.  Taking I-70 to I-75 adds 40 minutes to the trip; in fact, it's not even one of Google's suggestions.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Connecting cities via interstate highways based on population will always be a moving shell game, as populations increase and decrease.  Is there truly a need to connect Toledo and Columbus via an interstate, just because of their population numbers within a state?  The *interstate* system seems more set up to connect cities country-wide; states can deal with highways to connect cities *intrastate* if the need was there.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

And the closer you get to Columbus, the bigger the pain in the ass it becomes.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2021, 01:39:52 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Connecting cities via interstate highways based on population will always be a moving shell game, as populations increase and decrease.  Is there truly a need to connect Toledo and Columbus via an interstate, just because of their population numbers within a state?  The *interstate* system seems more set up to connect cities country-wide; states can deal with highways to connect cities *intrastate* if the need was there.

The two cities, at minimum, warrant a freeway design between them.

That corridor would also link Columbus and Detroit.

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 26, 2021, 02:56:51 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2021, 01:39:52 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Connecting cities via interstate highways based on population will always be a moving shell game, as populations increase and decrease.  Is there truly a need to connect Toledo and Columbus via an interstate, just because of their population numbers within a state?  The *interstate* system seems more set up to connect cities country-wide; states can deal with highways to connect cities *intrastate* if the need was there.

The two cities, at minimum, warrant a freeway design between them.

That corridor would also link Columbus and Detroit.

I-73, right?

Quote from: tolbs17 on July 26, 2021, 02:58:58 PM
I-73, right?

A northern I-73 would be nice for an interstate designation, but upgrading US 23/OH 15 between Waldo and Findlay, as well as adding a freeway connection to I-75 south of there, would be great.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2021, 01:39:52 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Connecting cities via interstate highways based on population will always be a moving shell game, as populations increase and decrease.  Is there truly a need to connect Toledo and Columbus via an interstate, just because of their population numbers within a state?  The *interstate* system seems more set up to connect cities country-wide; states can deal with highways to connect cities *intrastate* if the need was there.

For a long distance purpose, it's part of the Detroit/most of Eastern Michigan to the Carolinas/Southern VA route.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 26, 2021, 12:00:26 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2021, 11:40:48 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 26, 2021, 11:22:13 AM
Colorado has tons of areas off the interstate.

Colorado's top ten cities are all on the interstate system.

True, but a lot of the Southwest part of the state there are no interstates for hundreds of miles.

But the two largest cities in that area have a combined 40K people (Montrose & Durango).  They are the 32nd and 33rd most populous cities in the state respectively.  Important cities for their region, sure, but not for the state in general.

Chris

What's the big deal about connecting Detroit to Columbus via Interstate? It'll save you maybe 5-10 minutes total to make it an Interstate all the way. I-75 to OH-15 to US-23 doesn't seem to present too much of a problem.

I suspect this thread by one of the usual suspects (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29823.msg2641174#msg2641174) is an example of someone's perception being influenced by where he lives (as I noted in my comment in that thread).

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2021, 04:44:47 PM
What's the big deal about connecting Detroit to Columbus via Interstate? It'll save you maybe 5-10 minutes total to make it an Interstate all the way. I-75 to OH-15 to US-23 doesn't seem to present too much of a problem.

Fun

Quote from: 1995hoo on July 26, 2021, 04:51:46 PM
I suspect this thread by one of the usual suspects (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29823.msg2641174#msg2641174) is an example of someone's perception being influenced by where he lives (as I noted in my comment in that thread).

I'm going to start referring to the people who create random threads about nothing as "the usual suspects".

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 03:20:41 PM

Quote from: tolbs17 on July 26, 2021, 02:58:58 PM
I-73, right?

A northern I-73 would be nice for an interstate designation, but upgrading US 23/OH 15 between Waldo and Findlay, as well as adding a freeway connection to I-75 south of there, would be great.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2021, 01:39:52 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 26, 2021, 11:05:18 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on July 26, 2021, 10:36:53 AM
It's weird to have major cities that aren't connected by interstate, as pretty much everything in Colorado is (largest town not within 15-20 miles of an interstate is Montrose, population 20K).

You'll love Ohio's system then. No interstate between Columbus and Toledo, the first and fourth largest cities in the state.

Connecting cities via interstate highways based on population will always be a moving shell game, as populations increase and decrease.  Is there truly a need to connect Toledo and Columbus via an interstate, just because of their population numbers within a state?  The *interstate* system seems more set up to connect cities country-wide; states can deal with highways to connect cities *intrastate* if the need was there.

For a long distance purpose, it's part of the Detroit/most of Eastern Michigan to the Carolinas/Southern VA route.

That's a really specific and vague route all at the same time.  A lack of interstates between two medium-sized cities exist all over the country.

Some of the discussion regarding toll by plate elsewhere made me think of another example: I believe that transponders should be completely free.  That's because that's how it is in NY (unless you get stuck with a PANYNJ tag, anyways); you pay $25 for the tag, $15 goes into the account immediately, the other $10 is refunded to the account once you set up automatic replenishment, and there are no monthly/annual fees.  While I was somewhat aware that this wasn't the case elsewhere, I only really had to confront that issue when I investigated what I'd need to do to get SunPass for a Florida trip in 2018 (I opted to shunpike for the one portion of the route where I would have needed to deal with AET toll roads).

Quote from: 1995hoo on July 26, 2021, 04:51:46 PM
I suspect this thread by one of the usual suspects (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29823.msg2641174#msg2641174) is an example of someone's perception being influenced by where he lives (as I noted in my comment in that thread).

On the same note, I find things like toll roads and covered bridges to be interesting because they aren't common nowadays in Washington.

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on July 26, 2021, 12:51:42 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 25, 2021, 12:35:07 PM
I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

This is a good point, the Hampton Roads/Tidewater region is one of the most heavily populated areas that I can think of that's so poorly served by the Interstate highway system. Essentially, it's I-64 and not a lot else. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel gives you (expensive) access northward, but via US 13 which is not a freeway for the most part. It's a long haul to Wilmington, DE on that one. And routes to and through neighboring NC are 1950's style arterials, though that is slated to change eventually.

All this aside, the Hampton Roads metro is a top 40 market (population wise) but it's at a dead end on our IH system.

Tidewater may be a dead end on the interstate system, but that's true of many coastal cities including Charleston and San Francisco. Tidewater has pretty good highway connections. US 58, which arguably should be a freeway to South Hill, is mostly expressway and freeway connecting Tidewater to I-85 and I-95. US 17 south is four lanes past Elizabeth City down to the excellent NC highway system. US 17 north is a leisurely four lane road through mostly rural Eastern VA. VA 168 to US 158 is four lanes to the Outer Banks. US 13 north is four lanes through the Delmarva Peninsula to Dover with good highways connecting to the I-95 corridor. The underused, slow US 460 is four lanes to I-295 around Petersburg. For only having one interstate highway, Tidewater is still pretty well-served for highway transportation with the main problem being the local bottlenecks any time one needs to cross a body of water (HRBT, High Rise Bridge, etc).

I've lived in the rural Jackson Purchase region of Kentucky for all of my life. Regular commutes here usually involve either two-lane highways and/or lightly trafficked four-lane arterials (which have 65 mph speed limits). Freeways are what you take to either make a day trip to Nashville or go on vacation somewhere.
When I was a child, I was excited to go on freeways in metropolitan areas because I thought roads with eight or more lanes and stack interchanges were cool, and today, the prospect of driving on such roads is intimidating to me, since I've only ever driven on my local, rural roads.

I grew up in northwestern Kansas, in a county whose county roads (and there are a lot of them!) had no names when I lived there.  No letters, no numbers, no names, just nothing.  I thought that was normal.

When I later lived in southern Illinois, and I saw two-tracks out in the countryside (https://goo.gl/maps/jcDxt7cdZP8ui9AG9) given full-named green street blades, I thought it was ridiculous.

Quote from: vdeane on July 26, 2021, 07:57:40 PM
Some of the discussion regarding toll by plate elsewhere made me think of another example: I believe that transponders should be completely free.  That's because that's how it is in NY (unless you get stuck with a PANYNJ tag, anyways); you pay $25 for the tag, $15 goes into the account immediately, the other $10 is refunded to the account once you set up automatic replenishment, and there are no monthly/annual fees.  While I was somewhat aware that this wasn't the case elsewhere, I only really had to confront that issue when I investigated what I'd need to do to get SunPass for a Florida trip in 2018 (I opted to shunpike for the one portion of the route where I would have needed to deal with AET toll roads).

Yeah, Florida's tag system sucks in that you have to pay for it.

The Northeast in general were some of the original adopters of electronic toll payments, and to encourage usage they basically "gave away" the toll tags by treating the $10 as a deposit.  They also provide free toll tag replacements when the internal batteries go dead - an issue with the 1st generation of toll tags, but the current tags have much longer-lasting batteries.

Of course, for what's it's worth, the Northeast population tends to be a bunch of hotheads that complain about anything and everything.  Telling them they'll need to pay for a tag to drive on a toll road would've been disastrous for the politicians.

Quote from: skluth on July 27, 2021, 12:21:39 PM

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on July 26, 2021, 12:51:42 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 25, 2021, 12:35:07 PM
I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

This is a good point, the Hampton Roads/Tidewater region is one of the most heavily populated areas that I can think of that's so poorly served by the Interstate highway system. Essentially, it's I-64 and not a lot else. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel gives you (expensive) access northward, but via US 13 which is not a freeway for the most part. It's a long haul to Wilmington, DE on that one. And routes to and through neighboring NC are 1950's style arterials, though that is slated to change eventually.

All this aside, the Hampton Roads metro is a top 40 market (population wise) but it's at a dead end on our IH system.

Tidewater may be a dead end on the interstate system, but that's true of many coastal cities including Charleston and San Francisco. Tidewater has pretty good highway connections. US 58, which arguably should be a freeway to South Hill, is mostly expressway and freeway connecting Tidewater to I-85 and I-95. US 17 south is four lanes past Elizabeth City down to the excellent NC highway system. US 17 north is a leisurely four lane road through mostly rural Eastern VA. VA 168 to US 158 is four lanes to the Outer Banks. US 13 north is four lanes through the Delmarva Peninsula to Dover with good highways connecting to the I-95 corridor. The underused, slow US 460 is four lanes to I-295 around Petersburg. For only having one interstate highway, Tidewater is still pretty well-served for highway transportation with the main problem being the local bottlenecks any time one needs to cross a body of water (HRBT, High Rise Bridge, etc).

Agreed on the points about the good, built up 4 lane highway system. And US-460 becomes divided four lanes west of Petersburg / I-85. The freeway system, however, lacks, for a metropolitan area over 2 million population with other major cities in a 4-5 hour radius.

My only two complaints -
- There should be at least two other freeway leaving the area, such as US-58 at least to Emporia / I-95, and then US-460 to Petersburg / I-295. The US-17 / US-13 corridor through North Carolina, Virginia, and the Delmarva Peninsula should ideally be a continuous interstate highway corridor as well, but that's obviously in the realm of fiction.
- The speed limits on the existing divided highways should be at least a minimum of 65 mph, ideally 70 mph. Despite not being limited access, they can still easily handle it based on current geometry. It becomes a slog crawling along at 55 mph or 60 mph for 60+ miles of wide open road.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2021, 04:44:47 PM
What's the big deal about connecting Detroit to Columbus via Interstate? It'll save you maybe 5-10 minutes total to make it an Interstate all the way. I-75 to OH-15 to US-23 doesn't seem to present too much of a problem.

...except for the southernmost 10-15 miles of that stretch....

Quote from: thspfc on July 26, 2021, 12:32:31 PM
Milwaukee and Chicago are the big cities that I go to the most. Both those cities have long stretches of suburbia along their main freeway approach from the west (about 30 miles for Milwaukee along I-94, and about 45 miles for Chicago along I-90). This is due to the fact that west is one of the only directions those metro areas can continue to sprawl, as they have Lake Michigan to the east and all of the land between the two cities is pretty much developed. For that reason I thought that all major cities have similarly long stretches of suburbs, but that's not the case.

I think I can echo this perception as well, citing the Twin Cities as my other fairly well traveled example.  Then one finally goes on a long road trip somewheres else and a place like Nashville just kind of comes up out of nowhere coming in from the northwest on I-24.  You're in the woods, and then suddenly, skyscrapers!

I also had the impression that for mid-sized and bigger cities, if there were freeways, they'd be hemmed in by subdivisions and big box stores and other sorts of development since that's what I saw most of the time in the Midwest.  But it's not always going to be like that.  Do a lap around the Quad Cities and it doesn't seem like there's very much to it.  The northern half of I-435 in KC was another one that struck me like that.

Going back further when I was first getting into maps, I at first expected that red and yellow Rand Mac generic divided highway to mean that road looked pretty much like the rural Wisconsin expressways I was familiar with.  Basically a freeway-style road with at grade junctions.  But I quickly figured out that wasn't the case and there was a wide range of roads that got the divided symbology.

Living in Charleston:

That one bridge being closed down paralyzes the entire area. That is the case here. We've had tarps fall on bridges, ice storms close down bridges, hurricane issues, and numerous other scares.

We have the Ravenel Bridge (US 17), the Ashley River Bridge (17 as well), the James Island Connector (SC 30), the Wando Bridge (I-526), the Don Holt Bridge (526), the Westmoreland Bridge (526), the Wappoo Cut Bridge (SC 171), the Isle of Palms Connector (SC 517), the Stono Bridge (SC 700), and the Limehouse Bridge (Main Rd).

That's TEN major bridges in our metropolitan area. All with at least 20,000 vehicles a day, most way more than that. If one of them has to close for any sort of time, traffic backs up through the entire area.

Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

And am I not allowed to support both good road infrastructure and good public transit (and good walking/biking infrastructure) at the same time?

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 06:07:01 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

And am I not allowed to support both good road infrastructure and good public transit at the same time?

You are and you are not.

On one level I support both since both are nice to have.

However, in the real world we have tradeoffs. Every dollar spent on one is a dollar that cannot be spent on the other. So while you can support both in theory, you must in reality choose one over the other at all times. Which is not to say you cannot strike a balance, but the rival nature of resources has to account for something, so there is that angle.

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 27, 2021, 01:56:44 PM

Quote from: skluth on July 27, 2021, 12:21:39 PM

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on July 26, 2021, 12:51:42 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 25, 2021, 12:35:07 PM
I-64 is the only interstate highway out of the Hampton Roads region, which is often heavily congested. And it's only useful when heading to specific destinations. Otherwise, it's all arterial highways for hundreds of miles (except only around 50 miles to I-295 via US-460 and 80 miles to I-95 via US-58) with artificially low 55 mph (ooh, they give you 60 mph on parts of US-58 and a small bit of US-17) limits until reaching an interstate highway / freeway (I-95, I-85, I-295, DE-1, I-77, I-81).

This is a good point, the Hampton Roads/Tidewater region is one of the most heavily populated areas that I can think of that's so poorly served by the Interstate highway system. Essentially, it's I-64 and not a lot else. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel gives you (expensive) access northward, but via US 13 which is not a freeway for the most part. It's a long haul to Wilmington, DE on that one. And routes to and through neighboring NC are 1950's style arterials, though that is slated to change eventually.

All this aside, the Hampton Roads metro is a top 40 market (population wise) but it's at a dead end on our IH system.

Tidewater may be a dead end on the interstate system, but that's true of many coastal cities including Charleston and San Francisco. Tidewater has pretty good highway connections. US 58, which arguably should be a freeway to South Hill, is mostly expressway and freeway connecting Tidewater to I-85 and I-95. US 17 south is four lanes past Elizabeth City down to the excellent NC highway system. US 17 north is a leisurely four lane road through mostly rural Eastern VA. VA 168 to US 158 is four lanes to the Outer Banks. US 13 north is four lanes through the Delmarva Peninsula to Dover with good highways connecting to the I-95 corridor. The underused, slow US 460 is four lanes to I-295 around Petersburg. For only having one interstate highway, Tidewater is still pretty well-served for highway transportation with the main problem being the local bottlenecks any time one needs to cross a body of water (HRBT, High Rise Bridge, etc).

Agreed on the points about the good, built up 4 lane highway system. And US-460 becomes divided four lanes west of Petersburg / I-85. The freeway system, however, lacks, for a metropolitan area over 2 million population with other major cities in a 4-5 hour radius.

My only two complaints -
- There should be at least two other freeway leaving the area, such as US-58 at least to Emporia / I-95, and then US-460 to Petersburg / I-295. The US-17 / US-13 corridor through North Carolina, Virginia, and the Delmarva Peninsula should ideally be a continuous interstate highway corridor as well, but that's obviously in the realm of fiction.
- The speed limits on the existing divided highways should be at least a minimum of 65 mph, ideally 70 mph. Despite not being limited access, they can still easily handle it based on current geometry. It becomes a slog crawling along at 55 mph or 60 mph for 60+ miles of wide open road.

I'm less concerned about interstate status itself. We both agree that US 58 should be a freeway (or at least a non-stop four-lane highway) west to I-95, or even I-85 (my preference). I never saw the need to upgrade US 17 to interstate when I lived in Portsmouth, though the recent upgrades along Dominion Blvd may have changed that. I do think US 17 to Williamston NC and US 13 in Delmarva should be converted to Wisconsin-style expressways. US 17 may be there now (it's been 15 years since I lived in the area). The 55 mph limit on US 460 is ridiculous; it can be ignored elsewhere but there is so little traffic once you get to Sussex and especially Prince George county that bored cops would probably pull someone over for hitting 65.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

According to consensus on this forum, the states with bad road infrastructure are NM, IL (except the tollways), PA (where HighwayStar lives, although that's a statewide assessment and it might be different in Philadelphia), and OK.

Quote from: 1 on July 28, 2021, 08:00:24 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

According to consensus on this forum, the states with bad road infrastructure are NM, IL (except the tollways), PA (where HighwayStar lives, although that's a statewide assessment and it might be different in Philadelphia), and OK.

It's not like Oklahoma's transit is anything special...

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:12:57 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 06:07:01 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

And am I not allowed to support both good road infrastructure and good public transit at the same time?

You are and you are not.

On one level I support both since both are nice to have.

However, in the real world we have tradeoffs. Every dollar spent on one is a dollar that cannot be spent on the other. So while you can support both in theory, you must in reality choose one over the other at all times. Which is not to say you cannot strike a balance, but the rival nature of resources has to account for something, so there is that angle.

It really just depends on the city. For example, Houston and Atlanta. Those two cities have some of the best freeways in the world from an aesthetic and design standpoint, yet both are notorious for their bad traffic. In 2008 TXDOT spent $2.8 billion to make the Katy Freeway the widest and most impressive in the world, yet it's still just as backed up as it was before the project. At that point you need to look elsewhere for solutions to your traffic problems. I think the main focus should be keeping the people that are only traveling a few miles off the freeway. Can't do anything about the thru traffic or the people who live in the far suburbs 20+ miles from downtown, but you can do something about the people who hop on the freeway for 3 miles then exit off. If you cut down on that it's less exiting, less merging, less weaving, less accidents. That's where bike paths and the like come in.

On the other hand you have Chicago, who has great public transit and a decent network of mixed use paths, but their freeways are way below par considering the huge population of the metro area. Chicago needs to invest in freeway upgrades rather than alternative transportation.

My perspective is that the haves continue to get improvements while the have-nots languish.

I always use the Mountain Parkway widening as an example. The existing road was built as a super-2 in the early 1960s and doesn't necessarily meet modern standards, especially the number of curves, but traffic moved well on it. The state is pushing to widen it to four lanes and there has been a drive to four-lane it for decades.

Meanwhile, you could take the existing super-2 portion of the Mountain Parkway and place it in any of following areas, and the residents of those areas would think that an interstate had been built for them:

Between Irvine and Stanton
Between Irvine and McKee
Between Frenchburg and Owingsville
Between Beattyville and Irvine
Between Beattyville and Jackson
Between Booneville and Jackson
Between Booneville and Manchester
Between Harlan and Hyden
Between Harlan and Hazard
Across Pine Mountain on US 119
Between Morehead and Sandy Hook
Between Sandy Hook and Louisa
Between Inez and Warfield
Between Warfield and South Williamson
Between Manchester and Berea
Between Monticello and Whitley City/Stearns

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:12:57 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 06:07:01 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

And am I not allowed to support both good road infrastructure and good public transit at the same time?

You are and you are not.

On one level I support both since both are nice to have.

However, in the real world we have tradeoffs. Every dollar spent on one is a dollar that cannot be spent on the other. So while you can support both in theory, you must in reality choose one over the other at all times. Which is not to say you cannot strike a balance, but the rival nature of resources has to account for something, so there is that angle.

If better transit removes some of the drivers from the roads, then it is possible that the existing road system will better serve the remaining drivers–thus providing a functional improvement to the road system.

Of course, the difference will invariably be negligible.

Quote from: 1 on July 28, 2021, 08:00:24 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

According to consensus on this forum, the states with bad road infrastructure are NM, IL (except the tollways), PA (where HighwayStar lives, although that's a statewide assessment and it might be different in Philadelphia), and OK.

Most of the northeast has poor roads, not just Philadelphia. DC, Baltimore, New York, and Boston all suffer for lack of infrastructure.

I also find the criticism of Atlanta, Dallas, Houston highways to be superficial. Maybe by some technical measure the congestion is "worse" but I find it far easier to get around any of those than Philly or Chicago.
And even to the extent it is not, I would much rather spend an extra 10 minutes in a Town Car in Houston waiting for traffic to clear than ride public transit in the likes of Philly or Chicago.

Baltimore not having I-70 continue to I-95 is not a "lack of infrastructure" .

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 29, 2021, 10:41:36 AM
Baltimore not having I-70 continue to I-95 is not a "lack of infrastructure" .

Oh yes it is. So is the fact that I-95 has a gap in DC, the fact that I-76 is 4 lanes leaving Philadelphia, the fact that I-95 was half assed through Boston, and the fact that NYC has few freeways at all.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 29, 2021, 10:26:28 AM
I also find the criticism of Atlanta, Dallas, Houston highways to be superficial. Maybe by some technical measure the congestion is "worse" but I find it far easier to get around any of those than Philly or Chicago.
And even to the extent it is not, I would much rather spend an extra 10 minutes in a Town Car in Houston waiting for traffic to clear than ride public transit in the likes of Philly or Chicago.

Granted public transit in US cities aren't that great compared to the rest of the world, but would you still avoid riding a comparable European city's rail transit, or high speed rail for intercity trips, like the plague in favor of driving on their crowded roads and highways?

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 29, 2021, 10:48:20 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 29, 2021, 10:41:36 AM
Baltimore not having I-70 continue to I-95 is not a "lack of infrastructure" .

Oh yes it is.

The I-70 extension would have been nice to have been built, but it's really not the end of the world as you make it out to be. I-695 to I-95 is a viable alternative and has comparable travel times. Anyone heading to Downtown is using that routing, which is all freeway and not losing anything. You act like it's the end of the world and they have to travel blocks of city streets, severely clogging up local routes, taking 30+ minutes to travel a few miles, etc. It's not, not even close.

How much traffic is truly heading to Downtown Baltimore that's overwhelming the other routes, of which are built with 8+ lanes, are fully controlled access interstate highways, and have a free flowing flyover at the I-695 / I-95 junction?

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 29, 2021, 10:26:28 AM
And even to the extent it is not, I would much rather spend an extra 10 minutes in a Town Car in Houston waiting for traffic to clear than ride public transit in the likes of Philly or Chicago.

What does your preference have to do with anything?

I, for one, love taking public transit in Chicago.  I'm currently planning a family vacation there, and my plan is to leave the car at the hotel and never get in it again till it's time to go home.  One of the things I look forward to the most is that my kids will get to ride the L for the first time.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

You've got the chain of causality backwards. Public transit is supported where comprehensive road infrastructure is almost wholly inappropriate. Good roads are built where necessary (largely due to past policy decisions that are hard to reverse).

And there are far more boondoggle roads than public transit projects.

Quote from: vdeane on July 25, 2021, 12:30:19 PM
The "one should use the freeway system as the backbone of all local trips" mindset was something I had growing up, lost in college, and only regained upon moving to the Capital District.  The "one should use the interstate system as the backbone of all trips" mindset only developed upon moving here...

New York in Illinois are similar in that they have the highest quantities of 2-digit Interstates* (i.e. they rank second and first, respectively).  Illinois has expressways, whose miles are almost entirely labeled with some Interstate designation--even the tollways.  This notion of using Interstates as the backbone of every trip is very prevalent here, even if the density of expressways in Chicagoland is overall pretty sparse considering the massive sprawl of this metropolis.  Illinois has expressways that are fully limited-access, 55-mph country roads, and 45-mph 4-lane roads in the suburbs.  That's about it for highways.  This state sees no other options.  The rural expressway is almost a foreign concept, though the advent of IL-336 in recent years is challenging the lack of intermediate highway options.

Another facet of growing up in Chicagoland: tollways are accepted as normal.  They might not be considered anything besides aggravating to some, but they're at least recognized as a part of normal life.  We simply get ourselves an IPass at the local supermarket, and move on.  And at least around here, the tollways are built and maintained to a higher standard than that of the freeways.


*Fully realized Interstates.  For example, I-2, I-69, and I-14 in Texas can buzz off.

Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 29, 2021, 12:03:55 PM
Another facet of growing up in Chicagoland: tollways are accepted as normal.  They might not be considered anything besides aggravating to some, but they're at least recognized as a part of normal life.

And, I might add, a convenient way to get rid of unwanted spare change!  That is, before they stopped taking cash...

Quote from: kphoger on July 29, 2021, 12:18:41 PM

Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 29, 2021, 12:03:55 PM
Another facet of growing up in Chicagoland: tollways are accepted as normal.  They might not be considered anything besides aggravating to some, but they're at least recognized as a part of normal life.

And, I might add, a convenient way to get rid of unwanted spare change!  That is, before they stopped taking cash...

For a while, I usually gave exact change at businesses if I have it; I still do for some totals. (I've used up most of my dimes and nickels except for the ones in my collection.) Most businesses give out more coins than they receive.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 29, 2021, 10:48:20 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 29, 2021, 10:41:36 AM
Baltimore not having I-70 continue to I-95 is not a "lack of infrastructure" .

Oh yes it is. So is the fact that I-95 has a gap in DC, the fact that I-76 is 4 lanes leaving Philadelphia, the fact that I-95 was half assed through Boston, and the fact that NYC has few freeways at all.

Oh no not this again

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

Detroit is a city that lives and dies by the automobile. I guess considering it's the Motor City that is just a bit ironic but mass transit is pretty non existent in Detroit. The bus system is really the only public transportation available. The People Mover keeps you downtown, the QLine is basically a supplement to the Woodward bus route and only takes you to Grand Blvd., DDOT's Route 4 takes you to 8 Mile.

The freeway system is vast as it was built for a city of 2 million people (metro area currently has around 4.2 million). The Lodge, Chrysler, Fisher, Ford and Jeffries all take you out of town. Lack of infrastructure is that Detroit doesn't have a better transit system. The freeways are routinely jammed up with traffic and the lack of a mass transit system is part of the problem. Even Cleveland (a city that has roughly the same population density that Detroit does) has a subway granted it's only one line, the other's are Light Rail.

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

I worked for 6 years in SF in Civic Center before the pandemic has afforded me the opportunity to work from home, and rode BART probably 70% of the time.

I hesitate to call 2010s-present BART "clean" for the most part, and did opt to drive to work if I was heading outside of the downtown core afterward, or simply wanted to avoid the unkempt stations. 

SF's transit setup is so oriented towards the downtown core and Mission Street that anything west of Divisadero only works on a transit level if one is either right on the 38 line (Geary) or along the streetcar lines (i.e. the N Judah and L Taraval).  Otherwise car usage becomes much more important again in the Richmond District and in most of the Sunset.

BART had proposed a Geary line in the 1960s (which would have partially replaced the streetcar service that ended on that street in 1956-1957) but that died out when the extension to Marin County via Golden Gate Bridge was nixed, and has never been revisited.  A second transbay tube is in long-term planning, though not slated to exist before 2040 or so.

Quote from: TheStranger on July 29, 2021, 09:21:35 PM
SF's transit setup is so oriented towards the downtown core and Mission Street that anything west of Divisadero only works on a transit level if one is either right on the 38 line (Geary) or along the streetcar lines (i.e. the N Judah and L Taraval).  Otherwise car usage becomes much more important again in the Richmond District and in most of the Sunset.

Yea that's a flaw I see with BART; not enough coverage for a dense area like SF. And both Muni and VTA light rail aren't that great in terms of service quality (and maybe even coverage) for SF and SJ respectively imo.

A BART line under Geary (thinking probably either a Blue or Green line reroute) would be great for that area, though I don't see it happen in the near future unfortunately.

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

Those areas support public transport because the roads are awful to start with and because so many people are too broke to afford a car anyway.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 30, 2021, 12:05:58 AM

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

Those areas support public transport because the roads are awful to start with and because so many people are too broke to afford a car anyway.

That isn't the reason at all.

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 30, 2021, 12:05:58 AM

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

Those areas support public transport because the roads are awful to start with and because so many people are too broke to afford a car anyway.

More like some people don't want to be stuck in traffic, and spend $10-15 per hour on parking every day, and rather take the train when it's convenient.

Though if you prefer to drive 100% of the time, that's your choice.

I'll gladly switch places with you if it's an option. You can have the car-centric Cincinnati, while I'll take Philadelphia's rail system, which imo is solid compared to most other American systems (though definitely still fall flat when comparing to rail transit in European cities).

^ New York and DC seem better compared to Philadelphia in terms of transit.

Quote from: kphoger on July 29, 2021, 12:18:41 PM

Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 29, 2021, 12:03:55 PM
Another facet of growing up in Chicagoland: tollways are accepted as normal.  They might not be considered anything besides aggravating to some, but they're at least recognized as a part of normal life.

And, I might add, a convenient way to get rid of unwanted spare change!  That is, before they stopped taking cash...

I do that at self checkouts at grocery stores.

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM
I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

This is even apparent within transit systems.  It's why Pace (Chicago RTA's suburban bus network) has good coverage in Cook County but mediocre service in DuPage County.

The less dense the population is, the farther spread out the transit arteries are going to be, and the more sinuous/convoluted the routes are going to be in order to serve as many needs as possible.  It's why suburban bus routes so often go out of their way to serve clusters of apartment complexes and factories and shopping malls, at the expense of Joe Schmoe in a neighborhood of single-family homes who just needs to commute to and from his office job every day.

One thing that's a bit counterintuitive is that it's infrastructure that creates density, not the other way around. Pedestrian and animal-powered infrastructure leads to small villages and dense cities. Trains and canals lead to larger dense cities. Roads lead to sprawl in a market system (because minimally improving open land and externalizing transportation costs is much more profitable than dense development, if you have modest capital).

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 30, 2021, 12:40:31 AM
^ New York and DC seem better compared to Philadelphia in terms of transit.

I don't think any other US city can compare to NYC for transit.

I'm not going to debate about Philly vs DC transit, as DC relies on the metro for most of its rail transit, while Philly have a variety (metro, trams, commuter rail), but what I like about Philly's rail system is that all commuter rail lines are electrified, unlike those in Chicago and Boston.

Quote from: US 89 on July 30, 2021, 12:47:30 AM

Quote from: kphoger on July 29, 2021, 12:18:41 PM

Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 29, 2021, 12:03:55 PM
Another facet of growing up in Chicagoland: tollways are accepted as normal.  They might not be considered anything besides aggravating to some, but they're at least recognized as a part of normal life.

And, I might add, a convenient way to get rid of unwanted spare change!  That is, before they stopped taking cash...

I do that at self checkouts at grocery stores.

Haha so do I.

I used to get rid of pennies at the toll booths, and nickels on the bus.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 30, 2021, 12:23:32 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 30, 2021, 12:05:58 AM

Quote from: skluth on July 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 07:55:53 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on July 28, 2021, 06:02:16 PM
Generally speaking, those from regions with poor road infrastructure are quick to support "public transit" schemes and other boondoggles, while those who know what good roads look like prefer good road infrastructure.

Like what regions?

I'd say it's more about population density than how good the roads are. Dense urban areas like NYC, SF, DC, and Chicago all support public transit because driving in those urban areas is usually more difficult than hopping on a subway or other transit. A lot of people think most of the US needs to drive while forgetting the sheer mass of people living in urban areas. The NYC metro area alone is almost 19M people. Driving was near impossible the one time I visited NYC in the late 70's. It hasn't gotten better. I didn't mind the subway, though it's not as pretty or clean as the DC Metro or BART. These metro areas have transit comparable to those found in Europe or Japan.

Less dense urban areas tend to revolve around the car. Dallas, LA, and Kansas City are all good examples of less dense metros. All have minimal transit systems for their size, especially compared to similar-sized cities in Europe and East Asia.

Those areas support public transport because the roads are awful to start with and because so many people are too broke to afford a car anyway.

More like some people don't want to be stuck in traffic, and spend $10-15 per hour on parking every day, and rather take the train when it's convenient.

Though if you prefer to drive 100% of the time, that's your choice.

I'll gladly switch places with you if it's an option. You can have the car-centric Cincinnati, while I'll take Philadelphia's rail system, which imo is solid compared to most other American systems (though definitely still fall flat when comparing to rail transit in European cities).

With adequate infrastructure there is no reason for them to be stuck in traffic or paying too much for parking, both, the former especially, reflect a failure to construct adequate infrastructure. However no amount of construction can remedy the fundamental flaws of public transit.

Philadelphia's rail system only looks good on a map, in real life it is extremely unpleasant to ride around in other people's filth, next to someone that has not bathed in days, across from some homeless guy panhandling the train for money, only to get off in a downpour 4 blocks from where you actually need to be trying to carry two sacks of groceries.
Rarely is it even faster than driving, and often then not by enough to matter. Much more enjoyable to drive in the rain in a big Lincoln Town Car and get out right where you need to be without lying in other people's filth (oh and you can smoke/eat/drink/listen to music in the car, all are theoretically banned on the Subway, but that law seems selectively enforced).

Me in every other city I visit: "Why are there fewer freeways, but their interchanges are all bigger and better than ours?"

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 30, 2021, 12:23:32 AM
More like some people don't want to be stuck in traffic, and spend $10-15 per hour on parking every day, and rather take the train when it's convenient.

Though if you prefer to drive 100% of the time, that's your choice.

I'll gladly switch places with you if it's an option. You can have the car-centric Cincinnati, while I'll take Philadelphia's rail system, which imo is solid compared to most other American systems (though definitely still fall flat when comparing to rail transit in European cities).

That's exactly what it should be, a choice. However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs. Politicians know this so they choose not to provide the proper funding for roads or to deliberately reduce capacity to force people to take public transit even though it's largely obsolete. Look at NYC, I have to drive there for work sometimes and the shear amount of lanes they have taken away to make bike lanes or bus lanes, in many cases that hardly anyone uses, is a major disincentive to drive into the city when it would otherwise be possible, and is starting to drive business away.

And looking into the future, the two big "problems" with road infrastructure (carbon emissions and the task of driving) will be almost nonexistent in a few decades due to the introduction of electric and driverless cars. So now politicians and transit advocates have to work even harder to convince people of transit's "superiority" as people wake up to the fact that driving is possible, more convenient, and in fact liberating. Just look at the volume of used car sales since corona. Dealerships can't keep cars on the lot anymore

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs.

Ehh, for me, it depends still. I would still choose transit in certain situations, and more so in an European or East Asian city. In cities I've been in where buses and intracity trains are frequent enough that you don't have to rely on a schedule (very rare in the US), and the sidewalk infrastructure is adequate to get from a station to final destination, it's the preferred option for me.

I'll just leave it here, as after all, this is a roads forum, not a rail forum.

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 30, 2021, 12:23:32 AM
More like some people don't want to be stuck in traffic, and spend $10-15 per hour on parking every day, and rather take the train when it's convenient.

Though if you prefer to drive 100% of the time, that's your choice.

I'll gladly switch places with you if it's an option. You can have the car-centric Cincinnati, while I'll take Philadelphia's rail system, which imo is solid compared to most other American systems (though definitely still fall flat when comparing to rail transit in European cities).

That's exactly what it should be, a choice. However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs. Politicians know this so they choose not to provide the proper funding for roads or to deliberately reduce capacity to force people to take public transit even though it's largely obsolete. Look at NYC, I have to drive there for work sometimes and the shear amount of lanes they have taken away to make bike lanes or bus lanes, in many cases that hardly anyone uses, is a major disincentive to drive into the city when it would otherwise be possible, and is starting to drive business away.

And looking into the future, the two big "problems" with road infrastructure (carbon emissions and the task of driving) will be almost nonexistent in a few decades due to the introduction of electric and driverless cars. So now politicians and transit advocates have to work even harder to convince people of transit's "superiority" as people wake up to the fact that driving is possible, more convenient, and in fact liberating. Just look at the volume of used car sales since corona. Dealerships can't keep cars on the lot anymore

I am not seeing even a correlation between the addition of bike and bus lanes to an exodus of businesses from NYC.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 31, 2021, 09:54:35 PM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs.

Ehh, for me, it depends still. I would still choose transit in certain situations, and more so in an European or East Asian city. In cities I've been in where buses and intracity trains are frequent enough that you don't have to rely on a schedule (very rare in the US), and the sidewalk infrastructure is adequate to get from a station to final destination, it's the preferred option for me.

I'll just leave it here, as after all, this is a roads forum, not a rail forum.

Frequency and wider sidewalks do nothing to remedy the underlying nature of public transit.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 03:34:11 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 31, 2021, 09:54:35 PM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs.

Ehh, for me, it depends still. I would still choose transit in certain situations, and more so in an European or East Asian city. In cities I've been in where buses and intracity trains are frequent enough that you don't have to rely on a schedule (very rare in the US), and the sidewalk infrastructure is adequate to get from a station to final destination, it's the preferred option for me.

I'll just leave it here, as after all, this is a roads forum, not a rail forum.

Frequency and wider sidewalks do nothing to remedy the underlying nature of public transit.

What is the "nature" of public transit?

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 04:04:15 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 03:34:11 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 31, 2021, 09:54:35 PM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs.

Ehh, for me, it depends still. I would still choose transit in certain situations, and more so in an European or East Asian city. In cities I've been in where buses and intracity trains are frequent enough that you don't have to rely on a schedule (very rare in the US), and the sidewalk infrastructure is adequate to get from a station to final destination, it's the preferred option for me.

I'll just leave it here, as after all, this is a roads forum, not a rail forum.

Frequency and wider sidewalks do nothing to remedy the underlying nature of public transit.

What is the "nature" of public transit?

Primarily the following factors:

• Sharing space with total strangers
• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot
• Inherent lack of climate control for the entire journey, with minimal climate control often being the norm even in Buses

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 04:44:09 PM
Primarily the following factors:

• Sharing space with total strangers
• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot
• Inherent lack of climate control for the entire journey, with minimal climate control often being the norm even in Buses

I'm surprised you can find a totally private grocery store and mall to shop in. What luxury.

They even move the store so it's right on your normal commute and requires no diversions whatsoever.

And they even adjust the temperature for you!

Quote from: Bruce on August 02, 2021, 03:10:31 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 04:44:09 PM
Primarily the following factors:

• Sharing space with total strangers
• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot
• Inherent lack of climate control for the entire journey, with minimal climate control often being the norm even in Buses

I'm surprised you can find a totally private grocery store and mall to shop in. What luxury.

They even move the store so it's right on your normal commute and requires no diversions whatsoever.

And they even adjust the temperature for you!

He's pretty much like Kernals12 when it comes to transit here.

Quote from: Bruce on August 02, 2021, 03:10:31 AM
I'm surprised you can find a totally private grocery store and mall to shop in. What luxury.

His points were regarding the transportation between Point A and Point B, not the final destination itself. Irrelevant comparison.

When I commuted to UMass Lowell by bus, the bus was 500 feet from my house (about as close as you can get without living on a major arterial), and it went directly to downtown Lowell. There was no problem with most of the other people there (and the few with problems weren't directed at me or anyone else on the bus). My main issue is that the last bus runs at 7 PM weekdays, 6 PM Saturdays, and 5 PM Sundays, but they run much later in Boston compared to the suburbs. The temperature on the buses is fine; the issue only comes up if you need to wait outside for a transfer.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 04:44:09 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 04:04:15 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 03:34:11 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 31, 2021, 09:54:35 PM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 31, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
However in the case where roads and transit are actually given the proper priority and people have a true choice, driving in my opinion is clearly superior, because you are never bound to a schedule, you can go wherever you want, whenever, and don't have to be stuck in a box with a bunch of miserable people and nutjobs.

Ehh, for me, it depends still. I would still choose transit in certain situations, and more so in an European or East Asian city. In cities I've been in where buses and intracity trains are frequent enough that you don't have to rely on a schedule (very rare in the US), and the sidewalk infrastructure is adequate to get from a station to final destination, it's the preferred option for me.

I'll just leave it here, as after all, this is a roads forum, not a rail forum.

Frequency and wider sidewalks do nothing to remedy the underlying nature of public transit.

What is the "nature" of public transit?

Primarily the following factors:

• Sharing space with total strangers
• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot
• Inherent lack of climate control for the entire journey, with minimal climate control often being the norm even in Buses

You do realize there are trade offs here that people can find positive right?

Don't have to worry about parking
Someone else can do the driving while you can do something else
The cost of purchasing and maintaining a car.

One of my kids used to live in Chicago without a car.  He could do pretty much whatever he wanted with public transit and Uber.  If he wanted to drive somewhere, he would reserve a rental from the local Enterprise.  Another one currently lives in Tokyo, and the idea of even driving a car makes no sense to him.  He can get anywhere in the city he wants without much effort outside of walking three blocks to the train station.  And if wants to go to a different part of the country, the train can take him there too.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 10:57:12 AM
You do realize there are trade offs here that people can find positive right?

Don't have to worry about parking
Someone else can do the driving while you can do something else
The cost of purchasing and maintaining a car.

One of my kids used to live in Chicago without a car.  He could do pretty much whatever he wanted with public transit and Uber.  If he wanted to drive somewhere, he would reserve a rental from the local Enterprise.  Another one currently lives in Tokyo, and the idea of even driving a car makes no sense to him.  He can get anywhere in the city he wants without much effort outside of walking three blocks to the train station.  And if wants to go to a different part of the country, the train can take him there too.

I mentioned parking above, he said something about a city providing adequate parking would make it a non-issue.

I guess his ideal cityscape is 1960s Houston, with lots of parking. Looks like a part of the city got bombed in WW2 or something.
(https://i.imgur.com/T29j5Rk.png?1)

He also made the absurd comment that people in areas like New York, DC, San Francisco, and Chicago support public transportation "because so many people are too broke to afford a car anyway." He's simply delusional if he believes that. True, there are some people who fall within that description, but to suggest, as his comment seems to do, that the number is anywhere even remotely close to a large portion of people living in those metropolitan areas is to prove that the person making the comment is unfamiliar with the cities in question and is just trying to advance his own agenda.

---

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 10:03:56 AM
He's pretty much like Kernals12 when it comes to transit here.

I strongly suspect, in view of how he refuses to consider the legitimacy of any arguments that disagree with his own viewpoints, that he shares something else with kernals12.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2021, 11:08:51 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 10:03:56 AM
He's pretty much like Kernals12 when it comes to transit here.

I strongly suspect, in view of how he refuses to consider the legitimacy of any arguments that disagree with his own viewpoints, that he shares something else with kernals12.

kernals12 posts like a kid. HighwayStar does not. I'm almost certain they're not the same person. I can't imagine kernals12 making long and detailed (but wrong) arguments about economic theory and price gouging or about redlining.

Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 11:11:39 AM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2021, 11:08:51 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 10:03:56 AM
He's pretty much like Kernals12 when it comes to transit here.

I strongly suspect, in view of how he refuses to consider the legitimacy of any arguments that disagree with his own viewpoints, that he shares something else with kernals12.

kernals12 posts like a kid. HighwayStar does not. I'm almost certain they're not the same person. I can't imagine kernals12 making long and detailed (but wrong) arguments about economic theory and price gouging or about redlining.

I didn't mean to suggest they're the same person. It's eminently clear they are not. My comment was more in the nature of the reason why both of them are so unwilling to concede the validity of any position that doesn't agree with theirs.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 11:02:01 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 10:57:12 AM
You do realize there are trade offs here that people can find positive right?

Don't have to worry about parking
Someone else can do the driving while you can do something else
The cost of purchasing and maintaining a car.

One of my kids used to live in Chicago without a car.  He could do pretty much whatever he wanted with public transit and Uber.  If he wanted to drive somewhere, he would reserve a rental from the local Enterprise.  Another one currently lives in Tokyo, and the idea of even driving a car makes no sense to him.  He can get anywhere in the city he wants without much effort outside of walking three blocks to the train station.  And if wants to go to a different part of the country, the train can take him there too.

I mentioned parking above, he said something about a city providing adequate parking would make it a non-issue.

I guess his ideal cityscape is 1960s Houston, with lots of parking. Looks like a part of the city got bombed in WW2 or something.
(https://i.imgur.com/T29j5Rk.png?1)

Why would a city want to use valuable real estate as temporary car storage versus a building where people can live or generate economic activity?

Another point that HighwayStar forgot, is that when you use public transit you can only use it according to their schedule, but with a car you can use it any time you want and/or need to. It's easy for pro-car people to forget this point, because the idea of having to follow a transit schedule is not something we normally think about.

(And yes, if transit's frequency is high enough, then in practice the riders don't consult schedules. But getting to that frequency is expensive.)

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:16:11 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 11:02:01 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 10:57:12 AM
You do realize there are trade offs here that people can find positive right?

Don't have to worry about parking
Someone else can do the driving while you can do something else
The cost of purchasing and maintaining a car.

One of my kids used to live in Chicago without a car.  He could do pretty much whatever he wanted with public transit and Uber.  If he wanted to drive somewhere, he would reserve a rental from the local Enterprise.  Another one currently lives in Tokyo, and the idea of even driving a car makes no sense to him.  He can get anywhere in the city he wants without much effort outside of walking three blocks to the train station.  And if wants to go to a different part of the country, the train can take him there too.

I mentioned parking above, he said something about a city providing adequate parking would make it a non-issue.

I guess his ideal cityscape is 1960s Houston, with lots of parking. Looks like a part of the city got bombed in WW2 or something.
(https://i.imgur.com/T29j5Rk.png?1)

Why would a city want to use valuable real estate as temporary car storage versus a building where people can live or generate economic activity?

Sprawl is about maximizing profits - increasing land value the most while implementing the fewest improvements. Individual landowners loved paving over lots in the '60s, because they could charge for parking, they didn't have to maintain the property beyond a minimal level, "improving" was very cheap, and the lots would be easily sold for redevelopment if surrounding land values increased.

Since the US (and Houston in particular) prioritizes the interests of individual landowners over public good, you end up with the picture above.

Building on what TxtoNJ says, Houston is also unique among American cities in that it doesn't have zoning for land use. I knew someone from Houston who laughed about how her church backed up to, and shared a dumpster with, a titty bar. That sort of thing would never be permitted in many places. (I don't know if it's still the case, but in DC for many years churches could veto liquor licenses for businesses within a certain radius of the church property.)

Another one I thought of: there's a gas station right on my route home (from most everywhere), so I tend to think of getting gas as something that is not at all inconvenient (especially as I get it en route somewhere when on the road).  This becomes an interesting contrast when reading discussions on electric vehicles, as the EV enthusiasts always bring up how easy home charging is and how inconvenient it is to go out and get gas.  I usually have to think about the trips out to get gas that I do when visiting my parents (who don't conveniently have a Stewart's Shop or Fastrac with gas right on the roads from I-590 to their house).

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 04:44:09 PM

• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot

I'd understand this issue if you said a mile or more. 

I take a leisurely walk to my local convenience store, a few blocks away, for milk.  Outside, without any climate control.

I walk a shopping center to go from one end to the other. Outside, without any climate control.

If you are so unwilling to walk a few blocks to catch a bus, I can only imagine how reliant you are on your car to drive very minimal distances.  [/list]

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on July 31, 2021, 06:38:10 PM
Me in every other city I visit: "Why are there fewer freeways, but their interchanges are all bigger and better than ours?"

And where did all the cloverleaves go?

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2021, 01:00:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 01, 2021, 04:44:09 PM

• Inherently not point to point, the Bus/Train/Trolley etc. does not come to my door, and likely requires a few blocks of transit on foot

I'd understand this issue if you said a mile or more. 

I take a leisurely walk to my local convenience store, a few blocks away, for milk.  Outside, without any climate control.

I walk a shopping center to go from one end to the other. Outside, without any climate control.

If you are so unwilling to walk a few blocks to catch a bus, I can only imagine how reliant you are on your car to drive very minimal distances.  [/list]

Good for you, but when the rain is coming down in sheets, or or the temp is -20, or 100 with full sun, none of those things are as pleasant as just being able to drive.
And I have no desire to walk several blocks in adverse weather only to get on a bus filled with panhandlers and other people and wallow in their filth.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
filled with panhandlers

I've never had a single person panhandle on the bus. They may do so outside before they get on, but not once they've paid.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
wallow in their filth.

Not my experience.

Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 08:15:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
filled with panhandlers

I've never had a single person panhandle on the bus. They may do so outside before they get on, but not once they've paid.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
wallow in their filth.

Not my experience.

Well, bear in mind he says he's from Philadelphia, so it's understandable that he has that totally accurate impression of his city. His mistake (well, one of his many mistakes) is that he isn't able to understand that not all cities are as bad as his is.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2021, 08:34:42 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 08:15:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
filled with panhandlers

I've never had a single person panhandle on the bus. They may do so outside before they get on, but not once they've paid.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
wallow in their filth.

Not my experience.

Well, bear in mind he says he's from Philadelphia, so it's understandable that he has that totally accurate impression of his city. His mistake (well, one of his many mistakes) is that he isn't able to understand that not all cities are as bad as his is.

I have lived in 5 different cities and visited countless others in my time, been panhandled in every place I rode public transit. DC, NYC, Philadelphia, Dallas, London, you name it.

^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

I have ridden transit numerous times in multiple cities including NYC, London, DC, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably more that I'm forgetting. I have only had to deal with a panhandler once, on the Marta train in Atlanta.

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2021, 02:49:13 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

I have ridden transit numerous times in multiple cities including NYC, London, DC, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably more that I'm forgetting. I have only had to deal with a panhandler once, on the Marta train in Atlanta.

But you have to understand HighwayStar's thought process: If he claims something happened to him, then in his mind nobody else's experience is valid because his experience is absolute truth.

I just ignore any panhandlers I encounter. Never had a problem doing that.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 02, 2021, 08:34:42 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 08:15:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
filled with panhandlers

I've never had a single person panhandle on the bus. They may do so outside before they get on, but not once they've paid.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 08:10:44 PM
wallow in their filth.

Not my experience.

Well, bear in mind he says he's from Philadelphia, so it's understandable that he has that totally accurate impression of his city. His mistake (well, one of his many mistakes) is that he isn't able to understand that not all cities are as bad as his is.

He may be from "Philadelphia", but maybe not in Philadelphia. The vast majority of those in Philly live in rowhouses where one parks on the street, and it's often unlikely you'll always get a spot in front of your home or even on your block. Certainly, he could live in a house with a driveway/garage, in a condo with dedicated parking, or otherwise have convenient access to parking, but as in many cities, many people don't have their car right outside their door every day & night.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

That is quite the assertion.  You think that "many" people are "impoverished by choice???"

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2021, 02:49:13 AM
I have ridden transit numerous times in multiple cities including NYC, London, DC, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably more that I'm forgetting. I have only had to deal with a panhandler once, on the Marta train in Atlanta.

I am sure I have had to as well, I just don't remember the circumstance.  It's usually a brief interaction.  Simply part of being in a city.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2021, 08:51:54 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

That is quite the assertion.  You think that "many" people are "impoverished by choice???"

My guess is that the reference is to addiction. Drug use is a choice. People make the conscious decision to recreationally use addictive substances and that addiction can lead to homelessness and poverty. No one is forced to shoot up smack or snort blow or smoke meth.

Quote from: hbelkins on August 03, 2021, 10:09:17 AM
My guess is that the reference is to addiction. Drug use is a choice. People make the conscious decision to recreationally use addictive substances and that addiction can lead to homelessness and poverty. No one is forced to shoot up smack or snort blow or smoke meth.

1. Peer pressure is a very strong factor, and they feel like they might not have a choice, even if they do.

2. Doctors overprescribing painkillers.

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2021, 02:49:13 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

I have ridden transit numerous times in multiple cities including NYC, London, DC, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably more that I’m forgetting. I have only had to deal with a panhandler once, on the Marta train in Atlanta.

this is nothing. try leaving the local walmart. or king soopers. one guy wasn't even asking for money, he wanted to know if i could spare a bud.

edited: fixed the screwy quote.

Quote from: hbelkins on August 03, 2021, 10:09:17 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2021, 08:51:54 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

That is quite the assertion.  You think that "many" people are "impoverished by choice???"

My guess is that the reference is to addiction. Drug use is a choice. People make the conscious decision to recreationally use addictive substances and that addiction can lead to homelessness and poverty. No one is forced to shoot up smack or snort blow or smoke meth.

I don't think this is the reason many are homeless.  I think many homeless have drug issues, but isn't really the underlying reason.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2021, 07:40:40 AM
But you have to understand HighwayStar's thought process: If he claims something happened to him, then in his mind nobody else's experience is valid because his experience is absolute truth.

Yep.

I remember waiting for a Metra train in suburban Chicago and striking up a conversation with a total stranger.  Neither one of us had particularly pressing plans, so we decided to just hang out around the city for the rest of the day.  We visited a church in the Austin neighborhood, grabbed some greasy burgers, went down to the Grant Park area, etc.  We ended up being casual friends for a year or two.  I remember taking an audio Frank Lloyd Wright tour of Oak Park with him once, he once gave me some hand-me-down coats, stuff like that.  Some of our conversations about Christianity have helped shape my theological opinions.  If I hadn't been taking public transit that day, "surrounded by strangers", then we never would have met.

Another time, I kept running into a semi-homeless man while riding the bus and the train in the suburb I lived in.  After two or three times bumping into each other, we started up a conversation on the bus.  For reasons both medical and otherwise, it was difficult for him to get and keep a job, and he didn't really have much family around to help him out.  Every month or two for a while, I'd help him out with groceries, even gave him a ride somewhere once or twice.  He asked me for a Bible to read at night in his cheap motel room.  If I hadn't been taking public transit, or if I had loathed being around down-and-out strangers, then I wouldn't have had the opportunity to lend him some help.

I've never been panhandled on the bus or train, but I have been plenty of times at or outside the station.  Sometimes I've helped them out (I once bought groceries for a couple of people while transferring buses at the old Saint Louis Greyhound station 13th & Cass, for example) and sometimes I've ignored them.  But I've also been panhandled just walking down the street, so I don't see how it's any different from that.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2021, 07:40:40 AM

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2021, 02:49:13 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 02, 2021, 11:25:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 09:33:21 PM
^ Then the problem is homelessness/poverty in those cities, not transit.

No, the problem is not enforcing the damn law. Panhandling is illegal on public transit, but no one is willing to fix the problem. Many of those people are homeless and impoverished by choice rather than circumstance. Its an inherent feature of transit that you are vulnerable to that kind of harassment. Fortunately the town car has thick doors.

I have ridden transit numerous times in multiple cities including NYC, London, DC, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably more that I'm forgetting. I have only had to deal with a panhandler once, on the Marta train in Atlanta.

But you have to understand HighwayStar's thought process: If he claims something happened to him, then in his mind nobody else's experience is valid because his experience is absolute truth.

I just ignore any panhandlers I encounter. Never had a problem doing that.

That's all fine and dandy, until they chase after you because they thought they were owed something. Being followed and harassed by deranged people is no one's idea of a picnic.
And yes, all this HAS HAPPENED, I know its hard to believe other people have a rich tapestry of experiences to draw on, but its true. Moreover, I know a fair number of people that have had similar experiences in a variety of cities.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:29:39 PM
That's all fine and dandy, until they chase after you because they thought they were owed something. Being followed and harassed by deranged people is no one's idea of a picnic.

They don't chase after a single person. If you say no, they try to find someone else.

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 11:15:15 AM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2021, 07:40:40 AM
But you have to understand HighwayStar's thought process: If he claims something happened to him, then in his mind nobody else's experience is valid because his experience is absolute truth.

Yep.

I remember waiting for a Metra train in suburban Chicago and striking up a conversation with a total stranger.  Neither one of us had particularly pressing plans, so we decided to just hang out around the city for the rest of the day.  We visited a church in the Austin neighborhood, grabbed some greasy burgers, went down to the Grant Park area, etc.  We ended up being casual friends for a year or two.  I remember taking an audio Frank Lloyd Wright tour of Oak Park with him once, he once gave me some hand-me-down coats, stuff like that.  Some of our conversations about Christianity have helped shape my theological opinions.  If I hadn't been taking public transit that day, "surrounded by strangers", then we never would have met.

Another time, I kept running into a semi-homeless man while riding the bus and the train in the suburb I lived in.  After two or three times bumping into each other, we started up a conversation on the bus.  For reasons both medical and otherwise, it was difficult for him to get and keep a job, and he didn't really have much family around to help him out.  Every month or two for a while, I'd help him out with groceries, even gave him a ride somewhere once or twice.  He asked me for a Bible to read at night in his cheap motel room.  If I hadn't been taking public transit, or if I had loathed being around down-and-out strangers, then I wouldn't have had the opportunity to lend him some help.

I've never been panhandled on the bus or train, but I have been plenty of times at or outside the station.  Sometimes I've helped them out (I once bought groceries for a couple of people while transferring buses at the old Saint Louis Greyhound station 13th & Cass, for example) and sometimes I've ignored them.  But I've also been panhandled just walking down the street, so I don't see how it's any different from that.

Let me put it this way, I have NEVER been panhandled in the car. People standing around outside sure, but being behind a locked door I don't have to worry about that. And walking down the street is an inherent part of using public transit, again NOT point to point.

Quote from: 1 on August 03, 2021, 12:30:48 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:29:39 PM
That's all fine and dandy, until they chase after you because they thought they were owed something. Being followed and harassed by deranged people is no one's idea of a picnic.

They don't chase after a single person. If you say no, they try to find someone else.

Except sometimes they do, been there, done that. Actually there were 2 of us, and they STILL chased us, granted the person I was with would have been no help at all.

Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 02, 2021, 11:28:53 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:16:11 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 02, 2021, 11:02:01 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2021, 10:57:12 AM
You do realize there are trade offs here that people can find positive right?

Don't have to worry about parking
Someone else can do the driving while you can do something else
The cost of purchasing and maintaining a car.

One of my kids used to live in Chicago without a car.  He could do pretty much whatever he wanted with public transit and Uber.  If he wanted to drive somewhere, he would reserve a rental from the local Enterprise.  Another one currently lives in Tokyo, and the idea of even driving a car makes no sense to him.  He can get anywhere in the city he wants without much effort outside of walking three blocks to the train station.  And if wants to go to a different part of the country, the train can take him there too.

I mentioned parking above, he said something about a city providing adequate parking would make it a non-issue.

I guess his ideal cityscape is 1960s Houston, with lots of parking. Looks like a part of the city got bombed in WW2 or something.
(https://i.imgur.com/T29j5Rk.png?1)

Why would a city want to use valuable real estate as temporary car storage versus a building where people can live or generate economic activity?

Sprawl is about maximizing profits - increasing land value the most while implementing the fewest improvements. Individual landowners loved paving over lots in the '60s, because they could charge for parking, they didn't have to maintain the property beyond a minimal level, "improving" was very cheap, and the lots would be easily sold for redevelopment if surrounding land values increased.

Since the US (and Houston in particular) prioritizes the interests of individual landowners over public good, you end up with the picture above.

"public good" yeah, because that is easy to define. I would argue the public good is better served by infrastructure that facilitates personalized transportation rather than a one size fits all approach.
I find sprawl nice actually, more space, plenty of shopping, and inherently hostile to foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues. Houston, Dallas, etc. are actually great city layouts today, easy to get around in the comfort of your car.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
"public good" yeah, because that is easy to define. I would argue the public good is better served by infrastructure that facilitates personalized transportation rather than a one size fits all approach.
I find sprawl nice actually, more space, plenty of shopping, and inherently hostile to foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues. Houston, Dallas, etc. are actually great city layouts today, easy to get around in the comfort of your car.

Foot traffic is a major driver of crime?  Europe must just be completely crime-ridden everywhere you go.  Japan too.

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 12:38:09 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
"public good" yeah, because that is easy to define. I would argue the public good is better served by infrastructure that facilitates personalized transportation rather than a one size fits all approach.
I find sprawl nice actually, more space, plenty of shopping, and inherently hostile to foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues. Houston, Dallas, etc. are actually great city layouts today, easy to get around in the comfort of your car.

Foot traffic is a major driver of crime?  Europe must just be completely crime-ridden everywhere you go.  Japan too.

Chris

Not foot traffic itself, that is a strawman, but environments favorable to foot traffic.

The comparison to Europe and Japan is entirely irrelevant. Neither is culturally or historically similar to the United States for direct comparison. In the case of Japan also I have doubts about the data quality. Now that said, some of the worst issues with being harassed on foot I had in Europe, so it happens there too.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
I have NEVER been panhandled in the car.

I have.  Therefore your point is not valid.

Wow, this makes arguments so much easier!

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:44:35 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 12:38:09 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
"public good" yeah, because that is easy to define. I would argue the public good is better served by infrastructure that facilitates personalized transportation rather than a one size fits all approach.
I find sprawl nice actually, more space, plenty of shopping, and inherently hostile to foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues. Houston, Dallas, etc. are actually great city layouts today, easy to get around in the comfort of your car.

Foot traffic is a major driver of crime?  Europe must just be completely crime-ridden everywhere you go.  Japan too.

Chris

Not foot traffic itself, that is a strawman, but environments favorable to foot traffic.

The comparison to Europe and Japan is entirely irrelevant. Neither is culturally or historically similar to the United States for direct comparison. In the case of Japan also I have doubts about the data quality. Now that said, some of the worst issues with being harassed on foot I had in Europe, so it happens there too.

Those comparisons are 100% relevant.  You made the claim that having areas with high foot traffic tend to bring crime.  I give you examples where that does not apply, and you drop some faux logical fallacies.  I've been to Europe upwards of 25-30 times and have had only one incident that would remotely qualify as "harassment", and that was in a train station in Bucharest where some Romani guys told me I had to leave the station to change money.  I knew that not to be true and possibly avoided getting mugged outside of the watching eyes of the station police. Maybe you just look like an easy mark?

Chris

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 01:03:15 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
I have NEVER been panhandled in the car.

I have.  Therefore your point is not valid.

Wow, this makes arguments so much easier!

If you pass a homeless guy holding a sign at an intersection, that counts as panhandling.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 01:05:47 PM
Maybe you just look like an easy mark?

I'm starting to think it must be something like that.  I've never had anyone following me, except when I had already helped someone else out, and they wondered if I might help them out too.  Just saying no has always worked.  If someone keeps following, then there's probably a reason.

(That was the Saint Louis incident I referred to earlier.  I left the 13th/Cass bus station before dawn looking for breakfast, with a suitcase and vase of flowers in hand (I was on my way to meet my now-wife in person for the first time).  A homeless man came up and warned me that I shouldn't be walking around that neighborhood at that time, and I explained I was looking for somewhere to grab breakfast while I waited for my next bus.  He offered to walk with me up to White Castle, as protection, in exchange for my buying him breakfast.  After getting back to the station, I had a while to wait still, so I ventured out again (now after dawn).  Some relative of the man had heard I helped him out, so he asked if I could buy him some groceries.  We went into the grocery store together, and I bought him some groceries.  Word got around, and another couple asked if I could go with them to the thrift store to buy some clothes for their kids.  Time was getting on, and I didn't really feel like buying gifts for the entire north side of Saint Louis, so I said no and went back to the bus station.)

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2021, 01:10:10 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 01:03:15 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
I have NEVER been panhandled in the car.

I have.  Therefore your point is not valid.

Wow, this makes arguments so much easier!

If you pass a homeless guy holding a sign at an intersection, that counts as panhandling.

Even if it didn't count, I've had plenty of people talk to me through the window of my car.  That's hardly any different than on the sidewalk, or in a bus station.

Sometimes I've given them some change, sometimes I've pulled over at a gas station and bought lunch to bring out to them, usually I just ignore them or tell them no.

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 01:14:36 PM
Even if it didn't count, I've had plenty of people talk to me through the window of my car.  That's hardly any different than on the sidewalk, or in a bus station.

Sometimes I've given them some change, sometimes I've pulled over at a gas station and bought lunch to bring out to them, usually I just ignore them or tell them no.

I think HighwayStar have windows closed all the time. Based on the posts above, he probably think he's too good for walking on the street, and looks down on people that do. He also likes bad walking infrastructure and forcing everyone to drive from point A to B as he thinks it reduces crime issues.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2021, 11:01:27 AM
I don't think this is the reason many are homeless.  I think many homeless have drug issues, but isn't really the underlying reason.

For the conversation at hand, it doesn't really matter what causes homelessness.  He just doesn't want to be around them, no matter what put them in that situation.  And he's far from the only person who would rather not be around them.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
And walking down the street is an inherent part of using public transit

Depends.  Sometimes, the bus stop is closer to your destination than the available parking.  I'd rather get off the bus right at the nearest corner than go hunting down side streets for a parking spot and then have to walk to my destination–especially if I'm worried about crime.  Then too, if I were worried about being harassed, I'd rather be on the sidewalk with a bunch of strangers (witnesses) than by myself between rows of empty cars in a dimly lit parking garage.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues

Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:44:35 PM
Not foot traffic itself, that is a strawman

If it's a strawman, then it's one you used.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 01:05:47 PM
I've been to Europe upwards of 25-30 times and have had only one incident that would remotely qualify as "harassment", and that was in a train station in Bucharest where some Romani guys told me I had to leave the station to change money.  I knew that not to be true and possibly avoided getting mugged outside of the watching eyes of the station police. Maybe you just look like an easy mark?

I've crossed the Mexican border at least twenty times, of which seven were just across the border for a couple of hours and the rest were to the interior for a week or so.  I've walked a couple of miles in Tijuana;  I've taken first-class, second-class, and chicken-class buses;  I've driven my own US-plated car, I've rented a car.  The only time I felt uncomfortable from someone on the street was when I was parallel-parking along the Malecón in Puerto Vallarta, and a guy noticed we were gringos driving a Nayarit-plated vehicle and asked (in English) if our car was a rental or if we had bought one down there.  Not sure why he would want to know that, unless he were planning to steal it.

In contrast, perhaps the friendliest person I've encountered while traveling was a lady behind me on the intercity bus between Ciudad Juárez and Ciudad Chihuahua.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 03, 2021, 02:05:18 PM
I think HighwayStar ... likes bad walking infrastructure and forcing everyone to drive from point A to B as he thinks it reduces crime issues.

As if somehow everyone will magically have enough money to buy and maintain a car.

People will walk if they need to walk–whether there are sidewalks or not.  In their absence, the people just make muddy paths through the grass.

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 02:17:02 PM
Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

I'm getting a very strong Montgomery County vibe from him.  Almost everyone I know from there or Bucks County has this kind of mentality - repping Philly as where they're from but don't like anything about the urban part of the city itself. 

Chris

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
"public good" yeah, because that is easy to define. I would argue the public good is better served by infrastructure that facilitates personalized transportation rather than a one size fits all approach.
I find sprawl nice actually, more space, plenty of shopping, and inherently hostile to foot traffic that tends to bring crime and other issues. Houston, Dallas, etc. are actually great city layouts today, easy to get around in the comfort of your car.

Not everyone is as misanthropic as you are.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 03:08:06 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 02:17:02 PM
Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

I'm getting a very strong Montgomery County vibe from him.  Almost everyone I know from there or Bucks County has this kind of mentality - repping Philly as where they're from but don't like anything about the urban part of the city itself. 

Chris

Nope, Philadelphia County, and not even from the city so not trying to claim it as a birthright (as if anyone would).

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2021, 01:10:10 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 01:03:15 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
I have NEVER been panhandled in the car.

I have.  Therefore your point is not valid.

Wow, this makes arguments so much easier!

If you pass a homeless guy holding a sign at an intersection, that counts as panhandling.

Even if that doesn't count it's happened to me before. I was once stopped on a freeway exit ramp in Atlanta and was harassed by these three guys who would block traffic on the ramp until someone bought a bottle of water from them. Similar thing happened in Austin except there it was two guys trying to wash my windows.

I thought every state's county route system worked like New Jersey's.

Imagine my shock when I visited Monmouth County for the first time.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 04:18:36 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 03:08:06 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 02:17:02 PM
Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

I'm getting a very strong Montgomery County vibe from him.  Almost everyone I know from there or Bucks County has this kind of mentality - repping Philly as where they're from but don't like anything about the urban part of the city itself. 

Chris

Nope, Philadelphia County, and not even from the city so not trying to claim it as a birthright (as if anyone would).

Aren't the city and country co-extensive?

Those from Texas seemingly assumes everyone knows what Bucee's is and loves it as much as they do.  That is unless you're from El Paso I'm to understand...but do they really count as Texas?

I've had panhandlers walk up to my car and attempt to open the doors while in the drive-thru. Does this make all drive-thrus crime-ridden hellholes?

Panhandlers onboard transit are extremely rare in Seattle, despite our homelessness crisis.

Quote from: SectorZ on August 03, 2021, 05:00:13 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 04:18:36 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 03:08:06 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 02:17:02 PM
Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

I'm getting a very strong Montgomery County vibe from him.  Almost everyone I know from there or Bucks County has this kind of mentality - repping Philly as where they're from but don't like anything about the urban part of the city itself. 

Chris

Nope, Philadelphia County, and not even from the city so not trying to claim it as a birthright (as if anyone would).

Aren't the city and country co-extensive?

Only since 1854.

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 05:29:34 PM

Quote from: SectorZ on August 03, 2021, 05:00:13 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 03, 2021, 04:18:36 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 03, 2021, 03:08:06 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2021, 02:17:02 PM
Outside of a density of public transit, both foot traffic and crime tend to come with poverty.  It sounds more like you just don't want to live anywhere that there are any people who can't afford a car–or anywhere that there are people who can't afford to make ends meet and resort to asking for handouts.  Well, that's your prerogative;  just don't go blaming sidewalks or bus stops for poverty and crime.

I'm getting a very strong Montgomery County vibe from him.  Almost everyone I know from there or Bucks County has this kind of mentality - repping Philly as where they're from but don't like anything about the urban part of the city itself. 

Chris

Nope, Philadelphia County, and not even from the city so not trying to claim it as a birthright (as if anyone would).

Aren't the city and country co-extensive?

Only since 1854.

Chris

You are correct, and one would think that Philadelphia would thus be clear, but since some come up with other counties I had to clarify the county as well.

He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Quote from: Bruce on August 03, 2021, 05:18:07 PM
I've had panhandlers walk up to my car and attempt to open the doors while in the drive-thru. Does this make all drive-thrus crime-ridden hellholes?

Panhandlers onboard transit are extremely rare in Seattle, despite our homelessness crisis.

Keyword there is "attempt" ie. the door can be locked, so you have some measure of protection from such intrusions.
I would much rather use a drive through from the safety of my car than ride public transit.

As bad as Seattle is getting its only a matter of time before it becomes a regular occurrence.

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 04, 2021, 01:30:22 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

That is the correct reading.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:49:32 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 04, 2021, 01:30:22 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

That is the correct reading.

So someone intentionally moved to Philadelphia???

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2021, 02:31:38 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:49:32 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 04, 2021, 01:30:22 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

That is the correct reading.

So someone intentionally moved to Philadelphia???

Yes, it does happen, mostly because while it would be nice to choose are place of residence purely on the basis of the optimal place to live, there are tradeoffs for education and work that have to be taken into consideration.  :coffee:

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 03:41:30 PM
Yes, it does happen, mostly because while it would be nice to choose are place of residence purely on the basis of the optimal place to live, there are tradeoffs for education and work that have to be taken into consideration.

Also the presence or absence of sidewalks.

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 03:41:30 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2021, 02:31:38 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:49:32 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 04, 2021, 01:30:22 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

That is the correct reading.

So someone intentionally moved to Philadelphia???

Yes, it does happen, mostly because while it would be nice to choose are place of residence purely on the basis of the optimal place to live, there are tradeoffs for education and work that have to be taken into consideration.  :coffee:

As someone who lives in Green Bay...I get that!

From Toronto, when I was little, I thought that all freeways had to be 3 or more lanes. I couldn't believe it at first when I was on a rural freeway, and commented that it had less lanes than the arterial back home.

From Wisconsin, traffic lights were on poles and trombone arms.  Then in Illinois it was similar except for the overhead signals, then elsewhere there were only overhead signals and I thought that was odd.

Like the OP, I grew up in Rochester, NY, so I have been spoiled by very light traffic (even a five-minute delay is groan-inducing), and a decent overall freeway network that one can use to get pretty much anywhere in the metro.

It's because of this that Rochester has been called the "20 minute city" , as you're theoretically never more than 20 minutes away from anywhere in the metro area. As suburbia has expanded eastward over the past few decades, some problem spots have developed — NY 441 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1295398,-77.4775297,3a,15y,64.41h,89.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPQQWKDRFTGJTYiIwIZhJXg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en) comes to mind as a corridor that's deficient by our standards but would be perfectly normal in other mid-sized metros — but for the most part, the 20 minute maxim holds true.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 25, 2021, 12:47:20 PM
True expressways are special to me as they don't really exist in the Northeast.

I have to agree, and I have often stated that NY should have more of this type of highway. While in Minnesota this summer I had another chance to drive some of the four-lane divided parts of MN 55, US 52, and US 61 and it reminded me again of how badly I wish parts of NY 14 and NY 104, among others, were four-lane divided.

Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:47:38 PM
Another one I thought of: there's a gas station right on my route home (from most everywhere), so I tend to think of getting gas as something that is not at all inconvenient (especially as I get it en route somewhere when on the road).  ... I usually have to think about the trips out to get gas that I do when visiting my parents (who don't conveniently have a Stewart's Shop or Fastrac with gas right on the roads from I-590 to their house).

This might depend more on the character of the area you live in than where it happens to be located. I totally understand your point about certain parts of Rochester and its inner suburbs, but I don't think it's specific to the Rochester area. There are certainly parts of Buffalo that have a similar lack of gas stations in residential areas, and I would imagine Albany as well. In my case, there aren't many gas stations due east from home, but there are gas stations on both of my primary routes to work and between home and the freeway.

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:34:19 PM
Like the OP, I grew up in Rochester, NY, so I have been spoiled by very light traffic (even a five-minute delay is groan-inducing), and a decent overall freeway network that one can use to get pretty much anywhere in the metro.

On the flipside...  Having lived a number of years in the Chicago area, I have little to no tolerance for people here in Wichita complaining about rush hour traffic.

Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2021, 03:43:44 PM

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:34:19 PM
Like the OP, I grew up in Rochester, NY, so I have been spoiled by very light traffic (even a five-minute delay is groan-inducing), and a decent overall freeway network that one can use to get pretty much anywhere in the metro.

On the flipside...  Having lived a number of years in the Chicago area, I have little to no tolerance for people here in Wichita complaining about rush hour traffic.

After driving from Seattle to Olympia last summer on I-5, I vowed never to complain about MSP traffic again.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on August 11, 2021, 06:29:17 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2021, 03:43:44 PM

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:34:19 PM
Like the OP, I grew up in Rochester, NY, so I have been spoiled by very light traffic (even a five-minute delay is groan-inducing), and a decent overall freeway network that one can use to get pretty much anywhere in the metro.

On the flipside...  Having lived a number of years in the Chicago area, I have little to no tolerance for people here in Wichita complaining about rush hour traffic.

After driving from Seattle to Olympia last summer on I-5, I vowed never to complain about MSP traffic again.

Well that's just JBLM. Even us locals try to avoid it when we can, same with other perennial chokepoints like Everett and the Renton-Bellevue stretch of I-405.

Rule of thumb is to assume you'll need 30 extra minutes on top of whatever the traffic apps estimate.

And meanwhile, here in OKC, traffic apps tend to quote times 10 minutes longer than it will take in real life.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2021, 04:11:16 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 03:41:30 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2021, 02:31:38 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:49:32 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 04, 2021, 01:30:22 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 04, 2021, 01:21:56 PM

Quote from: 1 on August 04, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
He's saying that if you live in Philadelphia County, then you live in the city proper (which you said you didn't).

Where did I say I did not live in the city proper?

I think your statement about birthright was misconstrued.  You weren't born in Philly but live there now.

Chris

That is the correct reading.

So someone intentionally moved to Philadelphia???

Yes, it does happen, mostly because while it would be nice to choose are place of residence purely on the basis of the optimal place to live, there are tradeoffs for education and work that have to be taken into consideration.  :coffee:

As someone who lives in Green Bay...I get that!

I wouldn't mind living in Green Bay. Some of the friendliest people in the country. There would also be an NFL team in my backyard, so that's nice.

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:35:27 PM

Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:47:38 PM
Another one I thought of: there's a gas station right on my route home (from most everywhere), so I tend to think of getting gas as something that is not at all inconvenient (especially as I get it en route somewhere when on the road).  ... I usually have to think about the trips out to get gas that I do when visiting my parents (who don't conveniently have a Stewart's Shop or Fastrac with gas right on the roads from I-590 to their house).

This might depend more on the character of the area you live in than where it happens to be located. I totally understand your point about certain parts of Rochester and its inner suburbs, but I don't think it's specific to the Rochester area. There are certainly parts of Buffalo that have a similar lack of gas stations in residential areas, and I would imagine Albany as well. In my case, there aren't many gas stations due east from home, but there are gas stations on both of my primary routes to work and between home and the freeway.

In this case, it's not just gas stations, but good gas stations.  Before I moved to Albany, I didn't really care much about brand and whatnot when I got gas; a gas station was a gas station.  Now, I heavily favor the nice gas station/convenience store chains (Stewart's, Fastrac, Sheetz, Wawa, QuickChek, Cumberland Farms, etc.) over ye typical gas station where possible, even when all I need is gas.  At some point, I got used to Stewart's being all over the place!  It definitely feels different when going to other areas and actually having to look to find the nice stations.

Quote from: vdeane on August 11, 2021, 09:05:44 PM
In this case, it's not just gas stations, but good gas stations.  Before I moved to Albany, I didn't really care much about brand and whatnot when I got gas; a gas station was a gas station.  Now, I heavily favor the nice gas station/convenience store chains (Stewart's, Fastrac, Sheetz, Wawa, QuickChek, Cumberland Farms, etc.) over ye typical gas station where possible, even when all I need is gas.  At some point, I got used to Stewart's being all over the place!  It definitely feels different when going to other areas and actually having to look to find the nice stations.

Wow, point taken: there are not a lot of Rochester-area gas stations on that list. It's basically only Fastrac, which I agree is decent, but even then there's only a handful of locations.

Quote from: vdeane on August 11, 2021, 09:05:44 PM

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:35:27 PM

Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:47:38 PM
Another one I thought of: there's a gas station right on my route home (from most everywhere), so I tend to think of getting gas as something that is not at all inconvenient (especially as I get it en route somewhere when on the road).  ... I usually have to think about the trips out to get gas that I do when visiting my parents (who don't conveniently have a Stewart's Shop or Fastrac with gas right on the roads from I-590 to their house).

This might depend more on the character of the area you live in than where it happens to be located. I totally understand your point about certain parts of Rochester and its inner suburbs, but I don't think it's specific to the Rochester area. There are certainly parts of Buffalo that have a similar lack of gas stations in residential areas, and I would imagine Albany as well. In my case, there aren't many gas stations due east from home, but there are gas stations on both of my primary routes to work and between home and the freeway.

In this case, it's not just gas stations, but good gas stations.  Before I moved to Albany, I didn't really care much about brand and whatnot when I got gas; a gas station was a gas station.  Now, I heavily favor the nice gas station/convenience store chains (Stewart's, Fastrac, Sheetz, Wawa, QuickChek, Cumberland Farms, etc.) over ye typical gas station where possible, even when all I need is gas.  At some point, I got used to Stewart's being all over the place!  It definitely feels different when going to other areas and actually having to look to find the nice stations.

Is it bad that I never heard of any of those gas station brands before?

I've also never heard of any of those either ^^

The Midwest and Northeast have a ton of "ubiquitous" chains that never make it out of their region. I've heard of a few of these in passing, but never seen them in person.

I do try and go out of my way to try regional chains if I'm out traveling, since the Pacific Northwest is about the last place you'll see national chains expand to.

Yep, I've never seen any of those either.  Heard of some of them, though.

On road trips, I tend to favor Love's, Road Ranger, Casey's, Stripes, Flying J, QuikTrip, Holiday, TA, and OnCue.  Ones that are hit or miss include Chevron, Exxon, BP, Phillips 66, Mobil, Speedway, Pemex, Alon, Valero, and Conoco.  Ones that tend be small and/or dumpy include 7-Eleven, Shell, and especially Sinclair.

I'm curious to know how many of those you New Yorkers are familiar with.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 09:54:28 AM
I'm curious to know how many of those you New Yorkers are familiar with.

Here you go. The ones that I've never heard of are in bold.

Love's - heard of and been to; 3 locations in NY.
Road Ranger - never heard of it.
Casey's - hmmm, it sounds familiar, but not sure if it's in reference to a gas station or something else.
Stripes - never heard of it.
Flying J - heard of and been to; not common, but there are a few around.
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.
Holiday - same as above
TA - I used to drive by this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0047978,-78.4097621,3a,25.3y,84.74h,87.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX7yA4NVyu1CGoDRmVOpbVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) all the time, but that's the only one I know of.
OnCue - never heard of it.
Chevron - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.
Exxon - heard of it, obviously, but it's not common in this area.
BP - same as above
Phillips 66 - never heard of it.
Mobil - of course; it's everywhere.
Speedway - same as Mobil; it replaced Hess in this area, so it's a lot more common now than it used to be.
Pemex - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.
Alon - never heard of it.
Valero - heard of it and been to; fairly common, but not quite like Mobil or Speedway.
Conoco - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.
7-Eleven - of course; it's everywhere.
Shell - of course; seems to be especially common in Ohio for whatever reason.
Sinclair - never heard of it.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 09:54:28 AM
Yep, I've never seen any of those either.  Heard of some of them, though.

On road trips, I tend to favor Love's, Road Ranger, Casey's, Stripes, Flying J, QuikTrip, Holiday, TA, and OnCue.  Ones that are hit or miss include Chevron, Exxon, BP, Phillips 66, Mobil, Speedway, Pemex, Alon, Valero, and Conoco.  Ones that tend be small and/or dumpy include 7-Eleven, Shell, and especially Sinclair.

I'm curious to know how many of those you New Yorkers are familiar with.

Love's - Y
Road Ranger - N
Casey's - Y
Stripes - N
Flying J - Y
QuikTrip - Y
Holiday - Y (haven't seen one in a long while)
TA - Y
OnCue - N
Chevron - Y
Exxon - Y
BP - Y
Phillips 66 - Y, but they appear to be diminishing?
Mobile - Y
Speedway - Y, especially after recent expansion into the area
Pemex - Seen it, but very, very rare experience
Alon - N
Valero - Y
Conoco - Y, but presence seems diminished
7-Eleven - Y
Shell - Y
Sinclair - Y

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/QuikTrip%2C_Des_Moines%2C_IA.jpg)

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Phillips 66 - never heard of it.

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 10:48:58 AM
Phillips 66 - Y, but they appear to be diminishing?

This has surprised me.  They're all over the place around here.

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 10:48:58 AM
Road Ranger - N
Stripes - N
OnCue - N
Alon - N

Bravo!  Of those, the only one that I've seen outside Oklahoma and Texas is Road Ranger.  (Alon also exists in New Mexico, and I think Stripes does too.  I've just never personally seen them there.)

The Road Ranger map extends east to Indiana, and is most concentrated in Illinois.  The one I most commonly use is in Sonora, TX.

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

Chris

When I search Phillips 66 locations in this area, all the Citgo and Kwik Fill locations come up.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:
No, they aren't.

In that case, I have heard of QuikTrip, but not been there, at least to my knowledge.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

I don't think so, no. Most of my Midwest travels have been in OH, MI, WI, MN, and ND and it doesn't look like there's many locations that far north (or east, in the case of OH and MI).

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:50:26 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Phillips 66 - never heard of it.

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 10:48:58 AM
Phillips 66 - Y, but they appear to be diminishing?

This has surprised me.  They're all over the place around here.

There was one in Hadley, MA that I believe recently switched brands.  They're rare up here.

The two places I spent the most time in are Cincinnati and St Louis, so in addition to the Y/N, I'll mark a (CIN) for one I've only seen in Cincy of the two places, and a (STL) for one only in St Louis, and nothing for both

Love's - Y, mostly rural areas though
Road Ranger - N
Casey's - N, but apparently there are 4 locations in my area from a quick search
Stripes - N
Flying J - N
QuikTrip - Y (STL)
Holiday - N
TA - N
OnCue - N
Chevron - N
Exxon - Y, but not common in these two areas. However, its sister brand (Mobil) is.
BP - Y
Phillips 66 - Y (STL)
Mobil - Y
Speedway - Y (CIN)
Pemex - N
Alon - N
Valero - N
Conoco - N
7-Eleven - Y (STL)
Shell - Y
Sinclair - N, turns out there are some in neighboring Indiana though from a search.

Some other brands I've seen before:
- Ameristop (CIN)
- Esso (Only outside of the US)
- Marathon (CIN)
- Pilot (Mostly rural areas)
- Sunoco (CIN)

And the ones with a supermarket:
- Costco
- Kroger
- Meijer
- Sam's

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Pemex - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 12, 2021, 11:35:30 AM
Pemex - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.

I suspect you copied my list and forgot to update Pemex, LOL  :D

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 11:41:25 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Pemex - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 12, 2021, 11:35:30 AM
Pemex - heard of it, but it doesn't exist in this area.

I suspect you copied my list and forgot to update Pemex, LOL  :D

Knew I would forget to change something when using your list  :-D

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

Chris

There's one in Watkins Glen, but that's recent.  It was a Gulf station as recently as 2018 when street view went through.

^^Green Bay still has one though Sinclair is long gone.  That gas station is now a Shell and they had to get permission to keep it there.
https://goo.gl/maps/QmqdcL9sZbGMGB5P8

Quote from: Bruce on August 11, 2021, 10:31:23 PM
I do try and go out of my way to try regional chains if I'm out traveling, since the Pacific Northwest is about the last place you'll see national chains expand to.

Nah, that'd be Oklahoma. Because the population density is so low here, the formulas executives use to calculate expected profit for a location don't work properly, and always return a "do not build" recommendation. Of course, they don't realize that Oklahomans are unusually willing to drive longer distances to go to an ordinary store. Costco took a risk and opened a store in north OKC against the recommendation of their formulas and traffic regularly backs up onto the turnpike.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 09:54:28 AM
Casey's ... OnCue. 

Hell yeah, OnCue! That's my gas station of choice. The reason OnCue exists is because of a deal between QuikTrip management and that of the Brown family, which owned the 7-Eleven franchise for Oklahoma City. Basically, the founders of QT helped train the Brown family patriarch in the convenience store business. When Brown moved to OKC to start his 7-Eleven franchise, he made a deal with QT–Brown would open no 7-Elevens in Tulsa so long as QT opened no QTs in OKC. And this agreement has held for decades.

Over the years, though, Brown's 7-Eleven and QT evolved in different directions, with 7-Eleven remaining a small corner gas station type of store and QT evolving more in the direction of Sheetz/Wawa, with dozens of pumps and a larger store including hot food offerings. Some Stillwater businessmen noticed the absence of a QT-format convenience store chain in OKC and created OnCue by basically copying the QT idea and expanding on it, including things like frozen yogurt bars and a full fast-food restaurant ("The Grill at OnCue") into their stores.

(This is a pattern that repeats over and over in OKC, by the way. Going from what I said above in response to Bruce, we tend to have national chains avoid us...so what ends up happening is some local businessperson travels to a coastal city, sees a concept they like, and then comes back to OKC and builds a copy of it and ends up making a killing.)

Now that the Brown family has sold their 7-Eleven franchise back to 7-Eleven corporate, the original agreement between QT and 7-Eleven no longer applies...but now QT would have to compete with OnCue should they try to enter OKC. Of course QT and OnCue are so similar, a lot of people wonder why QT doesn't just buy out OnCue and rebrand their stores. If they're going to do that, though, they'd better do it soon–OnCue is starting to expand outside of OKC (they have a store in Houston now).

As for Casey's...they've been absent from OKC for most of my life, but they just bought out all the local Circle Ks and rebranded them to Casey's. Hopefully they'll be upgrading the former Circle Ks over time, since most of them were kind of small and gross.

---

A little surprised to see people who have never heard of Phillips 66, Conoco, and/or Sinclair. Those (along with Standard, Texaco, and Kerr McGee) date back to the Route 66 era (where do you think Phillips Petroleum got the "66" from, after all?) and are appropriately represented in pop culture referencing that time period, even if they aren't as dominant in the present day as they were back then.

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 11:02:27 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

I don't think so, no. Most of my Midwest travels have been in OH, MI, WI, MN, and ND and it doesn't look like there's many locations that far north (or east, in the case of OH and MI).

There were some in MN when I grew up there as a kid.  Not nearly as common as Super America or Fina (are those still around?), but they were there.

Chris

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 12, 2021, 02:33:42 PM
As for Casey's...they've been absent from OKC for most of my life, but they just bought out all the local Circle Ks and rebranded them to Casey's. Hopefully they'll be upgrading the former Circle Ks over time, since most of them were kind of small and gross.

Casey's is more of a thing when we travel north or east (Iowa or Missouri).  The older stations aren't much to write home about, but a lot of them have been upgraded to nicer stations over the last few years.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 11, 2021, 09:41:59 PM

Quote from: vdeane on August 11, 2021, 09:05:44 PM

Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:35:27 PM

Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:47:38 PM
Another one I thought of: there's a gas station right on my route home (from most everywhere), so I tend to think of getting gas as something that is not at all inconvenient (especially as I get it en route somewhere when on the road).  ... I usually have to think about the trips out to get gas that I do when visiting my parents (who don't conveniently have a Stewart's Shop or Fastrac with gas right on the roads from I-590 to their house).

This might depend more on the character of the area you live in than where it happens to be located. I totally understand your point about certain parts of Rochester and its inner suburbs, but I don't think it's specific to the Rochester area. There are certainly parts of Buffalo that have a similar lack of gas stations in residential areas, and I would imagine Albany as well. In my case, there aren't many gas stations due east from home, but there are gas stations on both of my primary routes to work and between home and the freeway.

In this case, it's not just gas stations, but good gas stations.  Before I moved to Albany, I didn't really care much about brand and whatnot when I got gas; a gas station was a gas station.  Now, I heavily favor the nice gas station/convenience store chains (Stewart's, Fastrac, Sheetz, Wawa, QuickChek, Cumberland Farms, etc.) over ye typical gas station where possible, even when all I need is gas.  At some point, I got used to Stewart's being all over the place!  It definitely feels different when going to other areas and actually having to look to find the nice stations.

Is it bad that I never heard of any of those gas station brands before?

Out of those I've only heard of Wawa and Sheetz.

How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:42:13 PM
Out of those I've only heard of Wawa and Sheetz.

Same here.  And I've only heard of them because of this forum.

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Is Holiday the same one that's ubiquitous in southern Minnesota?

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:31:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 12, 2021, 02:33:42 PM
As for Casey's...they've been absent from OKC for most of my life, but they just bought out all the local Circle Ks and rebranded them to Casey's. Hopefully they'll be upgrading the former Circle Ks over time, since most of them were kind of small and gross.

Casey's is more of a thing when we travel north or east (Iowa or Missouri).  The older stations aren't much to write home about, but a lot of them have been upgraded to nicer stations over the last few years.

I think a lot of the Casey's stores are nice. Where I've generally seen them is Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Iowa. They only have one location that I know of in Michigan, in the Benton Harbor area off I-94.

There's a Casey's I've stopped at every time that I pass it on I-75. It's at exit 118 in Ohio a little town called Cridersville and there is a Dollar General, Speedway, Fuel Mart and Casey's at the same corner.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:45:39 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:42:13 PM
Out of those I've only heard of Wawa and Sheetz.

Same here.  And I've only heard of them because of this forum.

I know them from my trips to Pennsylvania but haven't heard of the other ones.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:46:07 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Is Holiday the same one that's ubiquitous in southern Minnesota?

Yeah, Holiday is in more places than just MI.  Not sure if I have seen any specifically in NY.

Admiral rings a bell, but the remaining two do not.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:46:07 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Is Holiday the same one that's ubiquitous in southern Minnesota?

Yeah it looks like it is. I included it in my list here because I haven't ever seen one outside of northern Michigan, mainly the U.P. I can't recall one anywhere in the Lower Peninsula. But it says they have over 600 locations in 10 states.

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

There are Krist's in Green Bay.  Always the cheapest gas but they look sketchy.

I would advise everyone to stay away from the Admiral brand. I have never trusted their stations which all seem to be pretty beat up and run down most of the time especially in the inner cities like Saginaw, Flint and Lansing. One thing I have noticed about them is the price on the sign and the price on the pump aren't the same a lot of times. They have locations all over the area but it really doesn't matter where they are located they look like something out of the ghetto at every location basically. They bought a lot of the old Clark stations and just converted them to their brand which to me is low quality. The Admiral closest to my house which is about a mile and a half or so away has had problems with water in the gas, this location has since switched to being an Exxon and a lot of the locations have co-branded with Marathon.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

Kwik Trip is the best gas station around.  I will go out of my way to stop there.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 12, 2021, 04:01:37 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   [emoji3]

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

Kwik Trip is the best gas station around.  I will go out of my way to stop there.

What makes it the best?

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 12, 2021, 03:59:30 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

There are Krist's in Green Bay.  Always the cheapest gas but they look sketchy.

Well I figured it was possible for them to have locations in other states but I haven't seen them. Michigan and Wisconsin seem a lot alike to me anyway.

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 04:03:11 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 12, 2021, 04:01:37 PM
Kwik Trip is the best gas station around.  I will go out of my way to stop there.

What makes it the best?

They give you gas.

The Admiral in Sault Ste Marie near the last I-75 exit has been rebranded as a Marathon.  The sign has "Admiral" under the big "M".

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

Chris

Until recently, Sinclair hadn't even made it to Washington. Now there's a few of them popping up in the Seattle area, along with Marathon.

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:53:47 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:46:07 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Is Holiday the same one that's ubiquitous in southern Minnesota?

Yeah it looks like it is. I included it in my list here because I haven't ever seen one outside of northern Michigan, mainly the U.P. I can't recall one anywhere in the Lower Peninsula. But it says they have over 600 locations in 10 states.

Holiday arguably remains the dominant gas station chain in the Twin Cities, and indisputably outside of the metro in most of Minnesota. Kwik Trip has made some inroads in the metro to heavy fanfare, but their on-the-ground presence in the Twin Cities so far has been strictly outer-suburban. A number of legacy Kwik Trip stores existed in Minnesota, mostly in the southeastern part of the state close to their La Crosse, WI headquarters but a couple in the Twin Cities metro's orbit (I-494/County 6 in Plymouth, I-35/County 19 in Stacy)

If you're from Illinois I suppose you somehow fall into the delusion that it is a masterpiece of geographic variance.

QT is in the southeast. KT is in the upper midwest -- and to me seems to be more of a smaller full-lines grocery store with gas pumps and some C-store items, based on my limited experience with them.

I'm guessing we'll be hitting some KTs in our trip across the UP and US 2 westward toward Glacier.

If we're talking about perceptions of gas stations based on where we live, around here it's Speedway sets the price for everyone else.

We have

Esso

Petro-Canada

those are the large ones...

then we have a few smaller ones:

Shell

Ultramar

Quote from: hbelkins on August 12, 2021, 09:58:42 PM
QT is in the southeast. KT is in the upper midwest -- and to me seems to be more of a smaller full-lines grocery store with gas pumps and some C-store items, based on my limited experience with them.

I'm guessing we'll be hitting some KTs in our trip across the UP and US 2 westward toward Glacier.

If we're talking about perceptions of gas stations based on where we live, around here it's Speedway sets the price for everyone else.

Are Kansas City and St Louis considered southeast now? QT is one of the most common gas station chains in those two cities.

Quote from: andrepoiy on August 12, 2021, 10:00:18 PM
We have

Esso

Petro-Canada

those are the large ones...

then we have a few smaller ones:

Shell

Ultramar

A few others: Canadian Tire Gas, Pioneer, Husky, Mobil. I'd also put Shell as a big chain here.

Quote from: GaryV on August 12, 2021, 05:05:17 PM
The Admiral in Sault Ste Marie near the last I-75 exit has been rebranded as a Marathon.  The sign has "Admiral" under the big "M".

Most of them have been rebranded as a co-brand of Marathon they still have the Admiral name as part of the name of the station though.

Like this one not too far from my house.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4159502,-84.0756847,3a,40.2y,319.65h,89.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjhwR9MkVlD1pyZwUnVjWmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on August 12, 2021, 08:53:59 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:53:47 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 03:46:07 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 12, 2021, 03:45:03 PM
How about these gas stations that I have never seen outside of Michigan?

Beacon & Bridge
Admiral
Holiday
Wesco
Krist

Just to name a few.

Is Holiday the same one that's ubiquitous in southern Minnesota?

Yeah it looks like it is. I included it in my list here because I haven't ever seen one outside of northern Michigan, mainly the U.P. I can't recall one anywhere in the Lower Peninsula. But it says they have over 600 locations in 10 states.

Holiday arguably remains the dominant gas station chain in the Twin Cities, and indisputably outside of the metro in most of Minnesota. Kwik Trip has made some inroads in the metro to heavy fanfare, but their on-the-ground presence in the Twin Cities so far has been strictly outer-suburban. A number of legacy Kwik Trip stores existed in Minnesota, mostly in the southeastern part of the state close to their La Crosse, WI headquarters but a couple in the Twin Cities metro's orbit (I-494/County 6 in Plymouth, I-35/County 19 in Stacy)

The one when I was there years ago that I remember was Super America which was part of Marathon then I see it was rebranded as Speedway which Marathon used to own until they sold them 7-11 last year.

I'll give you a gas station chain that you won't find outside of the Lansing, Michigan area and that is Quality Dairy which is commonly called just QD.

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 04:03:11 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 12, 2021, 04:01:37 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   [emoji3]

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

Kwik Trip is the best gas station around.  I will go out of my way to stop there.

What makes it the best?

1. Clean stores with clean bathrooms
2. Friendly employees - I can't recall having a poor customer experience at a Kwik Trip
3. I will never eat fresh food or a take home meal from a gas station except a KT.  It is fresh, healthy and tastes good.  They make everything themselves.

https://www.kwiktrip.com/vertical-integration

https://www.kwiktrip.com/takehomemeals

4. Great locations.  They are experts at mapping growth and placing stations early, so they generally are the most convenient and easy to get in and out.

Quote from: hbelkins on August 12, 2021, 09:58:42 PM
QT is in the southeast. KT is in the upper midwest -- and to me seems to be more of a smaller full-lines grocery store with gas pumps and some C-store items, based on my limited experience with them.

I'm guessing we'll be hitting some KTs in our trip across the UP and US 2 westward toward Glacier.

If we're talking about perceptions of gas stations based on where we live, around here it's Speedway sets the price for everyone else.

Speedway used to do that in Michigan too but lately it's been Admiral that has gone up in price first. Like you'd ride around Saginaw and see $3.04 or something on most stations maybe a few cents higher then all Admiral stations are at $3.29 even Speedway is still at a lower price. Then the next day every one else goes up in price.

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/QuikTrip%2C_Des_Moines%2C_IA.jpg)

Isn't Kwik Trip the one that has a different name in Iowa and Illinois just to avoid confusion with Quick Trip?

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 12, 2021, 10:02:00 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on August 12, 2021, 09:58:42 PM
QT is in the southeast. KT is in the upper midwest -- and to me seems to be more of a smaller full-lines grocery store with gas pumps and some C-store items, based on my limited experience with them.

I'm guessing we'll be hitting some KTs in our trip across the UP and US 2 westward toward Glacier.

If we're talking about perceptions of gas stations based on where we live, around here it's Speedway sets the price for everyone else.

Are Kansas City and St Louis considered southeast now? QT is one of the most common gas station chains in those two cities.

Quick Trip is based in Oklahoma so I'm not sure how it's just in the SE. It's not I'd say it's in the Midwestern, Southern and Southeast United States.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

Chris

Oddly, one appeared in mid-central Tennessee (https://goo.gl/maps/fqvy9emAZQHR1dcb9) (Street View/Google hasn't updated it). I'd always heard about them but never saw one until I'd first visited Iowa. I've seen them in Mountain West and Midwest locations.

Perceptions from living in Florida for 30 years distorts a lot of things; weather and living in the US cul-de-sac probably has a lot to do with that. Travel has upended and untwisted a lot of those perceptions, and moving 8 years ago also gives me a different outlook...It's supposed to do that!

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 13, 2021, 10:30:17 AM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:

No, they aren't.

snip

Isn't Kwik Trip the one that has a different name in Iowa and Illinois just to avoid confusion with Quick Trip?

In Iowa, yes, they go by Kwik Star. I think they only entered Illinois within the last few months but I don't think I heard what their name is there.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on August 13, 2021, 10:37:57 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 13, 2021, 10:30:17 AM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   :biggrin:

No, they aren't.

snip

Isn't Kwik Trip the one that has a different name in Iowa and Illinois just to avoid confusion with Quick Trip?

In Iowa, yes, they go by Kwik Star. I think they only entered Illinois within the last few months but I don't think I heard what their name is there.

I think it's also Kwik Star, I was trying to think of the other name they used and that's it Kwik Star. I'd say they have a presence around the Quad Cities area. I've seen a Kwik Trip in Illinois though I thought.

I've heard of Sinclair. They have a green dinosaur on their signs.

My favorite has to be the Kum and Go. A stop at one of those is sure provide hours of spontaneous quips for any road trip crew.  :-D

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 03:09:23 PM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 11:02:27 AM

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 12, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
Sinclair - never heard of it.

This one is surprising too.  I guess they're based out of Utah, but they still are around the Midwest quite a bit.  Never seen the green dinosaur?

I don't think so, no. Most of my Midwest travels have been in OH, MI, WI, MN, and ND and it doesn't look like there's many locations that far north (or east, in the case of OH and MI).

There were some in MN when I grew up there as a kid.  Not nearly as common as Super America or Fina (are those still around?), but they were there.

Chris

for some reason i thought sinclair was a wyoming/colorado thing. i know there's a sinclair wyoming, and i think there's a refinery there... well, there's some sort of industrial thingy there.. there is (or was? ...  i need to pay more attention when i'm driving) one in midtown fort collins.

Quote from: zachary_amaryllis on August 13, 2021, 01:49:18 PM
for some reason i thought sinclair was a wyoming/colorado thing. i know there's a sinclair wyoming, and i think there's a refinery there... well, there's some sort of industrial thingy there.. there is (or was? ...  i need to pay more attention when i'm driving) one in midtown fort collins.

Definitely based out of SLC.  Probably why there are so many around here.

Chris

I thought Sinclair was a TV thing...

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 13, 2021, 11:30:30 AM
My favorite has to be the Kum and Go. A stop at one of those is sure provide hours of spontaneous quips for any road trip crew.  :-D

Oh, I should have included that in my "top" list.  Kum and Go stations are always good.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 13, 2021, 10:26:15 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 12, 2021, 04:03:11 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 12, 2021, 04:01:37 PM

Quote from: kphoger on August 12, 2021, 10:49:16 AM

Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 10:26:56 AM
QuikTrip - is this the same as Kwik Trip? I have heard of and been to the latter, mostly because it's so common in Minnesota.

Ah, only someone who travels to Minnesota would ask that!   [emoji3]

No, they aren't.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Kwiktrip.jpg)

Kwik Trip is the best gas station around.  I will go out of my way to stop there.

What makes it the best?

1. Clean stores with clean bathrooms
2. Friendly employees - I can't recall having a poor customer experience at a Kwik Trip
3. I will never eat fresh food or a take home meal from a gas station except a KT.  It is fresh, healthy and tastes good.  They make everything themselves.

https://www.kwiktrip.com/vertical-integration

https://www.kwiktrip.com/takehomemeals

4. Great locations.  They are experts at mapping growth and placing stations early, so they generally are the most convenient and easy to get in and out.

Thanks.

Quote from: kphoger on August 13, 2021, 02:51:35 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on August 13, 2021, 11:30:30 AM
My favorite has to be the Kum and Go. A stop at one of those is sure provide hours of spontaneous quips for any road trip crew.  :-D

Oh, I should have included that in my "top" list.  Kum and Go stations are always good.

During a family trip to Colorado in 2016, all my brother & I had to do was start snickering from the back seat at the sight of one and my parents were instantly uncomfortable  :-D

Quote from: andrepoiy on August 12, 2021, 10:00:18 PM
We have

Esso

Petro-Canada

those are the large ones...

then we have a few smaller ones:

Shell

Ultramar

A few others: Canadian Tire Gas, Pioneer, Husky, Mobil. I'd also put Shell as a big chain here.
[/quote]

I recall seeing Husky when in Alberta. Until that point I thought they just made gas pumps because I'd seen the name on them at lots of stations over the years.

Pixel 2

Krist and Holiday extend west from the UP of Michigan into Wisconsin and Minnesota. There are also Holidays in North Dakota.

And Casey's in Minnesota.

Chevron is pretty common in BC.
All of the Real Canadian Superstore gas stations recently rebranded as Mobil.

We just got back from Oregon and a road trip to Crater Lake.  The concept of not pumping your own gas was totally alien to my wife's niece.  She thought I was lying when I told her it was the law in Oregon and thought there was no way a state would want to employ people for such an easier task.  I thought that was a somewhat odd statement considering she has been to Mexico numerous times.

Here's another Michigan gas station chain which is really only in the Thumb area. It's called Speedy Q and they have locations as far south as I-69, as far west as Bay City but most locations are in the Thumb. That one and Beacon & Bridge are Michigan only chains. I know this because they named it Beacon & Bridge in honor of Michigan's lighthouses and the Mackinac Bridge. Beacon & Bridge also carries as many Made in Michigan products as possible.

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 16, 2021, 07:52:58 AM
We just got back from Oregon and a road trip to Crater Lake.  The concept of not pumping your own gas was totally alien to my wife's niece.  She thought I was lying when I told her it was the law in Oregon and thought there was no way a state would want to employ people for such an easier task.  I thought that was a somewhat odd statement considering she has been to Mexico numerous times.

My parents were surprised by the "not being able to pump your own gas"  law too the first time we stopped for gas in NJ.

Quote from: jayhawkco on August 13, 2021, 01:51:50 PM

Quote from: zachary_amaryllis on August 13, 2021, 01:49:18 PM
for some reason i thought sinclair was a wyoming/colorado thing. i know there's a sinclair wyoming, and i think there's a refinery there... well, there's some sort of industrial thingy there.. there is (or was? ...  i need to pay more attention when i'm driving) one in midtown fort collins.

Definitely based out of SLC.  Probably why there are so many around here.

Chris

Sinclair was nationwide until 1969 when ARCO bought them and for anti-trust reasons were required to divest, then the eastern US locations were sold to BP.

There are a handful east of the Mississippi River in the midwest, but I was quite shocked several months ago to see one in New Jersey.  There are at least a few, all new, including this one in Swedesboro (https://goo.gl/maps/Wkwahu2dfUvtvcZD7).

Here's a repurposed Sinclair sign on Rochester Road in Clawson, MI

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5290613,-83.1369876,3a,32.3y,325.22h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssSySsBfaKM9hbKZMmLQg9Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Going back to the original topic, "How One's Perceptions Are Shaped by Where One Lives," I think the Traffic lights on roads with high speed limits" thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22073.0) poses a good example of someone's perceptions being shaped by the prevailing speed limits and use of traffic lights in his home area.

Original post:

Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2018, 08:55:15 PM
What roads have speed limits of 55 mph or higher, and yet still have traffic lights on them?
What is the highest posted speed limit in the US on a road with traffic lights?

A road segment must be signed for at least 50 mph and have at least three consecutive traffic lights to qualify. You have to start over if the speed limit drops, or it becomes a freeway.

NY 104 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2236872,-77.3758784,3a,75y,90.02h,75.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy5MtRtNuBw_iK6pLFe6pmQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), divided and signed 55 mph, has ten or so lights in the Town of Ontario.
NY 531 is also famous for 65 mph facing a signal (though it may drop to 55 briefly on the approach, and can't qualify anyway because only one light).

First reply to that:

Quote from: Bitmapped on January 17, 2018, 09:05:21 PM
This is very common in states with 4-lane expressway/divided highway networks. There are plenty of examples in Ohio and West Virginia with lights on routes with 60-65mph speed limits. If you're going down to 55mph, there are lots of examples in Kentucky, Virginia, and Pennsylvania as well.

OP's reply to the statement that it's "very common":

Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2018, 09:18:16 PM
I'm skeptical that such roads have many stoplights on stretches signed 55 mph or more.

I live in a state with a set maximum signed speed limit of 70 mph on interstates and 55 mph on rural two lanes. When I saw a 70 mph sign on a Nevada 2-lane for the first time on GSV a while ago, I thought it was absurd, until someone on the forum told me that it's normal.

Quote from: SkyPesos on August 16, 2021, 12:09:54 PM
I live in a state with a set maximum signed speed limit of 70 mph on interstates and 55 mph on rural two lanes. When I saw a 70 mph sign on a Nevada 2-lane for the first time on GSV a while ago, I thought it was absurd, until someone on the forum told me that it's normal.

They have 75 mph signed in Texas on two lane roads that around this region that would be signed as 55 mph.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 16, 2021, 11:19:24 AM
Going back to the original topic, "How One's Perceptions Are Shaped by Where One Lives," I think the Traffic lights on roads with high speed limits" thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22073.0) poses a good example of someone's perceptions being shaped by the prevailing speed limits and use of traffic lights in his home area.

...
First reply to that:

Quote from: Bitmapped on January 17, 2018, 09:05:21 PM
This is very common in states with 4-lane expressway/divided highway networks. There are plenty of examples in Ohio and West Virginia with lights on routes with 60-65mph speed limits. If you're going down to 55mph, there are lots of examples in Kentucky, Virginia, and Pennsylvania as well.

OP's reply to the statement that it's "very common":

Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2018, 09:18:16 PM
I'm skeptical that such roads have many stoplights on stretches signed 55 mph or more.

Partly a misconception on my part, but partly also just poor word choice. If you're including 55 mph, it is indeed very common. It's even relatively common here in NY, as was established in that thread. But if you limit it to above 55 mph, then if anything that thread only reinforced my belief that traffic signals in 60 and 65 zones are fairly rare and states that have many such examples are the exception rather than the rule.

(I also maintain that the NY 104 example I cited is somewhat unique in terms of the frequency of signals in a 55 mph zone, with 10 signals in 6.2 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.2302823,-77.2659217/43.2227156,-77.3874923/@43.2310446,-77.3626883,13z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0!5m1!1e1).)