AARoads Forum

 :ded:

I'm a new member, and not a truck driver. I just prefer driving over flying because I like to see the country, stop when I want, and try to find time to see the world's largest, tallest, oldest, whatever. In 2015 I drove 70/76 in Pennsylvania, wholly unaware it was a toll road. This last trip I stayed on I-90, as I was going from my home in NW Wyoming to New Hampshire. I didn't know it was toll either. Since when does the Eisenhower Interstate System cost? Nice way to run the poorer people off their own highways.  Anyway, I absolutely abhor the new system. Here's why:
1) It seems many of the billboards are gone. Yes they're ugly, but they're something to look at, they give you an idea what's "out there", what motels, restaurants, casinos, whatever are nearby. Plus, they keep a driver alert, like the old Burma Shave signs.
2) Since the billboards are gone, in places like upstate New York, a driver looks at trees and taillights. Driver might get drowsy.
3) The new "service plazas" are a huge paved parking lot with revenue grabbing facilities... but I have yet to find one that provides ANY shade, any place to actually rest. They're noisy and hot. Absolutely no way to take an hour nap. Some even had a two hour parking maximum.
4) So Drowsy Driver stops, gets a hamburger at the McDonald's drive through, and then he comes to the gas station. You see, you have to do it in that order. Either he has to eat in the car first, or set his hamburger down while he pumps gas while the burger gets cold. He can't go back to McDonalds because the plaza is one way. (I did, against the signs, because I got gas and wanted to wash my hands and get a drink)
5) And then, wholly unrested, Drowsy Driver is forced back on to the interstate.

The places called "Text stops" or just parking areas are better, quieter, although they lack a restroom.

The "real" rest stops like Wisconsin, Minnesota, Wyoming, etc have are lovely shady loops, with sometimes just a rest room, sometimes some information or vending machines, but they have shade, quiet areas, picnic tables, doggy areas, GRASS, birds, trees, sometimes billboard/displays about the area. They let you sleep in the car, overnight if needed. I was at one that had a bike trail leaving from it that went on for miles.

I got a very unsettled feeling driving the NY Thruway. I lost concept of where I was, the interstate is completely homogenous, just trees, no signs, so I didn't know where I was, nor could I get any inkling of what was beyond the trees, no signs told me Betty's Diner with Famous Blueberry Tarts was there, or a Navaho Casino, or a Howard Johnson's. It actually triggered a panic attack.

I have always loved the shaded loop rest areas. I actually do rest in them. At the right time of day one can find shadows from trees, and park there, open a window, kick back and take a 30 minute nap. I usually walk around the sidewalks and paths to help wake myself up (if there's hope) or stick my feet out the window and snooze awhile. That is completely impossible at the service plazas.

I want to know if this had been put to a vote. I absolutely cannot imagine anyone thinking it was a good idea.

When I was young, a toll road was a luxury, and a CHOICE. You could take the regular interstate, or chose a toll parkway and not contend with commercial vehicles or excessive exits. Now, people who drive a lot are going to have to take secondary roads so as not to have to pay tolls. The Eisenhower System was paid for by us all, with fuel taxes (and probably other taxes as well) Now those same taxpayers may not be able to use the system, and people like me WON'T use it anymore since I cannot stand the new system, and why the heck am I being charged for something I hate, didn't want, and provides drivers no safe place to rest??

Another consideration is the businesses that parasite off the interstate. No one is getting off to get gas, they just get it at a "plaza".

The whole thing is just one enormous greed grabbing ugly driver-unfriendly "upgrade."  I want to see the statistics to see if more drowsy drivers have had wrecks now that there's no easy place to rest.

Okay, vent over, but I'm still going to be writing some scathing letters.

S. Moon

The major eastern toll roads predate the Interstate System.

Yes. I suspect OP (welcome to the board) hasn't been to the East Coast before.

As mentioned, the toll roads predate the Interstate Highway System and are grandfathered in (same goes with the Chicago-area Interstate toll roads). The highways in question were built without IHS money.

The service plazas are also grandfathered in.

As for the actual resting, pull off the highway, find a park or shopping center with a shady parking lot, and take a nap. 

Every paper map I've ever seen differentiates between toll roads and free roads, even down to showing small differently-colored spots where there's a toll bridge on an otherwise-free route. I can't imagine planning a long-distance trip and not knowing one would encounter a toll facility along the chosen route.

Learn the art of shunpiking.

Quote from: hbelkins on September 27, 2021, 11:51:26 AM
Every paper map I've ever seen differentiates between toll roads and free roads, even down to showing small differently-colored spots where there's a toll bridge on an otherwise-free route. I can't imagine planning a long-distance trip and not knowing one would encounter a toll facility along the chosen route.

Even the official highway map for Michigan, a state without any toll roads, has notes pointing to its toll bridges.

Apparently the OP never actually thought to walk inside the service areas either, since he talks about the drive thru.  I suppose I'll just point out the obvious that eating while driving when drowsy is not a good idea.

Billboards have been illegal on the interstate system since forever; the grandfathered toll roads are actually some of the few places where they're visible.  Maybe he means the service signs?  But the Thruway still has them, just not for food or gas.

It's also probably worth pointing out that even regular rest areas out east often wouldn't be the quiet rest stops the OP wants due to traffic.  Plus not all states allow one to sleep in the car at a rest area.

Additionally, if the OP doesn't like a road lined by trees, he shouldn't drive in the southeast.  The interstates there make the Thruway look like wide open plains.

Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:13:41 PM
Apparently the OP never actually thought to walk inside the service areas either, since he talks about the drive thru.  I suppose I'll just point out the obvious that eating while driving when drowsy is not a good idea.

Billboards have been illegal on the interstate system since forever; the grandfathered toll roads are actually some of the few places where they're visible.  Maybe he means the service signs?  But the Thruway still has them, just not for food or gas.

It's also probably worth pointing out that even regular rest areas out east often wouldn't be the quiet rest stops the OP wants due to traffic.  Plus not all states allow one to sleep in the car at a rest area.

Additionally, if the OP doesn't like a road lined by trees, he shouldn't drive in the southeast.  The interstates there make the Thruway look like wide open plains.

I would wager that the OP doesn't get out much.  Hanging out in rest areas, asleep or not, might get you molested.   :ded:

Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:13:41 PM
Billboards have been illegal on the interstate system since forever; the grandfathered toll roads are actually some of the few places where they're visible.

Uh...what? I'm hard pressed to think of an interstate highway without billboards. They are certainly everywhere along the southern and western interstates I frequent, unless it's passing through a residential area or something.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 27, 2021, 11:17:36 AM
As for the actual resting, pull off the highway, find a park or shopping center with a shady parking lot, and take a nap.

A shady spot for an afternoon nap can generally be found at most of the service plazas on the New Jersey Turnpike (though not north of about Exit 11) and on the Garden State Parkway.  The Pennsylvania Turnpike plazas do not always have shade, but the two on I-95 in Maryland do.

Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:13:41 PM
Additionally, if the OP doesn't like a road lined by trees, she shouldn't drive in the southeast.  The interstates there make the Thruway look like wide open plains.

Fixed

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
I got a very unsettled feeling driving the NY Thruway. I lost concept of where I was, the interstate is completely homogenous, just trees, no signs, so I didn't know where I was, nor could I get any inkling of what was beyond the trees, no signs told me Betty's Diner with Famous Blueberry Tarts was there, or a Navaho Casino, or a Howard Johnson's. It actually triggered a panic attack.

The Thruway does need mileage-based exits and (especially) county line signs, I will hand you that.

But other than that, it's not much different than any other rural freeway. There's certainly not "no signs", and the service areas are well-signed. Until you get west of Utica, it passes through some really, really boring countryside, and given the nature of the road and how sparse the exits are, there's not much you can except NYSTA to do about making the local businesses more visible.

The Ladybird Johnson Highway Beautification Act limits the number and density of billboards on interstate highways.
This Wikipedia article is way more exhaustive than I care to dive into.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Beautification_Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Beautification_Act)

I was surprised at the number of billboards in Montana compared with Washington, or maybe I'm just used to the billboards close to home.  Maybe some states are more lax about enforcing billboard bans.

A- I am a SHE
B- I grew up in New Jersey
C- I have crossed the country more times than I could count, I just don't use interstates if I can help it. I've motorcycled it, driven it and walked a good part of it as well. Now I won't use interstates again.
D- They interstates I HAVE traveled were not toll roads, except a couple in NJ. I'm pushing sixty so perhaps I predate some of you.
E- You *could* be a little nicer. I didn't expect such unfriendly remarks.

Do you all think the plazas are a good idea? With no shade nor place to rest? Appalling idea. JMHO. I'm sticking to US highways.

Something weird is going on here.

Welcome to the forums.  I think there are a fair amount of interstates in the country that give you the feeling that you described in your OP, many of which aren't toll roads.  I-10 in the Florida panhandle is the first one that jumped to mind since there are so many southern pines that you can't see anything off the highway and get a sense of where you are so to speak. 

That said, I think you're getting some of the bristly reception only because when people do things and or go places that they didn't take the time to read up on, then have a negative experience, it's often quite self-inflicted.  I have friends who hated visiting a certain foreign country because they were unaware of certain cultural norms and in turn didn't appreciate things as much as they would had they done a little reading up.  We're all road nerds here, so the thought of doing a cross country trip without knowing certain generalities of the roads we're going to take seems foreign to us.  Often you'll be surprised by certain little things, but not knowing a road I was taking would be a toll road seems a little strange to me (and apparently others).

Also, this thread is a good example of others assuming every other place in the country is like where they're from (and I'm not just speaking of you).  Some states ban billboards.  Others have some every couple hundred feet it seems. 

Different strokes for different folks.  I like interstates for their efficiency when going long distances, and then I like more local roads when actually exploring areas.  They each have a place in how I plan trips.

Chris

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 06:54:14 PM
A- I am a SHE
B- I grew up in New Jersey
C- I have crossed the country more times than I could count, I just don't use interstates if I can help it. I've motorcycled it, driven it and walked a good part of it as well. Now I won't use interstates again.
D- They interstates I HAVE traveled were not toll roads, except a couple in NJ. I'm pushing sixty so perhaps I predate some of you.
E- You *could* be a little nicer. I didn't expect such unfriendly remarks.

Do you all think the plazas are a good idea? With no shade nor place to rest? Appalling idea. JMHO. I'm sticking to US highways.

I think part of it is that there's a huge difference between a "Rest Stop" and a "Service Plaza". Rest stops are generally more favorable for resting, using the restroom, eating at a picnic table, etc.  Service Plazas are generally along toll roads, and are more suited for giving you a place to sit inside.

To answer the question you posed: Both are fine. I'm not inclined to need a nap during the day anyway, so the lack of shade doesn't bother me.

For what it's worth: Technically, only about half of one toll road in NJ is an interstate. The rest aren't. Also, I've never seen, at least in recent times, anyone enforce a time restriction. They recognize that if you're tired and want to nap, you're better off taking a nap rather than enforcing a time restriction.

I will say though, if you grew up in NJ, that with your road knowledge you would've been completely baffled 70/76 wasn't the PA Turnpike. I mean...you had to go thru a toll plaza and get a toll ticket, right??

Quote from: Rothman on September 27, 2021, 07:17:37 PM
Something weird is going on here.

I'd like to know how fast the OP likes to drive.

Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2021, 08:26:22 PM

Quote from: Rothman on September 27, 2021, 07:17:37 PM
Something weird is going on here.

I'd like to know how fast the OP likes to drive.

Not wanting to use the Interstate system anymore is in huge conflicts with the beliefs of the user you're suggesting.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
Since when does the Eisenhower Interstate System cost?

1956

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
1) It seems many of the billboards are gone. Yes they're ugly, but they're something to look at, they give you an idea what's "out there", what motels, restaurants, casinos, whatever are nearby. Plus, they keep a driver alert, like the old Burma Shave signs.

As many people have alluded to, this varies from state to state and even city to city based on local law and zoning ordinances. Here in Oklahoma, for instance, they grow like weeds (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1447971,-97.4688944,3a,17y,322.15h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stT9kcPWupbCpPB__NjZdww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
2) Since the billboards are gone, in places like upstate New York, a driver looks at trees and taillights. Driver might get drowsy.

It's a driver's responsibility to not drive when drowsy. If they're getting drowsy, they need to find a place to stop. The DOT can only do so much; providing driver entertainment isn't within their remit (although you see some states try, like Pennsylvania's "nag signs" and the Kansas Turnpike Authority's oddly chatty signage–do we really need a supplemental sign for Denver in Wichita, or are you just trying to keep us awake?).

Given that you're from Wyoming, and have a professed preference for US routes, I'm a little surprised you consider this a problem. Billboards are pretty rare on US routes, and my understanding is that Wyoming is sparsely-enough populated that there isn't a whole lot to look at other than natural features while on the road in most parts of the state.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
3) The new "service plazas" are a huge paved parking lot with revenue grabbing facilities... but I have yet to find one that provides ANY shade, any place to actually rest. They're noisy and hot. Absolutely no way to take an hour nap. Some even had a two hour parking maximum.

Service plazas ("concession areas" in Oklahoma) are not a new thing, and were often built alongside pre-Interstate toll roads. They are actually prohibited under post-1956 regulations. Both service plazas and non-commercialized rest areas are often designed specifically to make it so that they are not attractive places to stay for an unduly long amount of time, because of people using the space for other than its intended purpose as a driver amenity–making drug deals, having sex, etc.

Misuse of the space and associated policing costs, as well as maintenance costs and budget cuts, and availability of services at freeway interchanges, have led some states to completely block off and/or tear down their rest areas entirely.

Quote
4) So Drowsy Driver stops, gets a hamburger at the McDonald's drive through, and then he comes to the gas station. You see, you have to do it in that order. Either he has to eat in the car first, or set his hamburger down while he pumps gas while the burger gets cold. He can't go back to McDonalds because the plaza is one way. (I did, against the signs, because I got gas and wanted to wash my hands and get a drink)
5) And then, wholly unrested, Drowsy Driver is forced back on to the interstate.

As mentioned above, going inside is also an option (at least in Kansas, I haven't traveled much in the northeast). There is also the option, if one doesn't like the turnpike facilities, to exit at an interchange and use whatever facilities exist there. Many interchanges have at least one gas and food option, and blue service signs direct travelers to them.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
When I was young, a toll road was a luxury, and a CHOICE. You could take the regular interstate, or chose a toll parkway and not contend with commercial vehicles or excessive exits.

Possibly in your state. In Oklahoma, toll roads were built early on for lack of any other way of funding a major freeway project before the Interstate System was built, and they continue to be built to fund needed projects that do not receive Congressional funding through the National Highway System (the Cherokee Turnpike, for example, was built as a safety upgrade to bypass a dangerous section of then-State Highway 33 that the DOT couldn't afford to build as a free road). All of our toll roads have always allowed commercial vehicles.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
Another consideration is the businesses that parasite off the interstate. No one is getting off to get gas, they just get it at a "plaza".

Personally, my family and I eschew using the service plaza gas stations, because they often charge a higher price to capitalize on the captive audience. We fill up either just before or just after using the toll road. I don't think this is a particularly unusual practice, at least among people on this forum.

I'm not a fan of service plazas in general. Since they have a captive audience, they price gouge. The restaurants located therein often do not offer the same deals, discounts, or accept coupons that off-system independent facilities do. And the convenience stores seem to mark up snack items more than your typical c-store.

Although I must say that I was pleasantly surprised to find gas at the Topeka service plaza on the Kansas Turnpike had gas priced comparable to stations to the west of Topeka on the free portion of I-70.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
The places called "Text stops" or just parking areas are better, quieter, although they lack a restroom.

Those are just old rest stops rebranded as "text stops", at least in New York's case.

---

I haven't had many bad experiences with rest stops, mostly because I don't stop that often. But as a Northeasterner, I can definitely say the stops along I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike are more than sufficient, especially the Charlton Service Plaza Eastbound. Also many good places when driving southwards from NY in general (after you get past NYC, of course).

As for the NY Thruway, I'm willing to trade scenery/interesting sights for its excellent quality. Also, I've been driving here for decades and I've never gotten "drowsy" due to a lack of sights to see while out on the road.

Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 27, 2021, 06:32:18 PM
The Ladybird Johnson Highway Beautification Act limits the number and density of billboards on interstate highways.
This Wikipedia article is way more exhaustive than I care to dive into.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Beautification_Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Beautification_Act)

Not just the interstates either, also the entire NHS.  Such actually caused issues with respect to Times Square when MAP-21 added all the roads with a Principal Arterial functional classification to the NHS.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 06:54:14 PM
E- You *could* be a little nicer. I didn't expect such unfriendly remarks.

Maybe you shouldn't have posted such a snark-filled, condescending rant. We can be quite friendly, even if we're all opinionated roadgeeks. We're not perfect either and there are verbal skirmishes all over this forum. But it's one of the most interesting websites to me. Welcome to another dysfunctional web family.

Quote from: US 89 on September 27, 2021, 05:34:56 PM

Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:13:41 PM
Billboards have been illegal on the interstate system since forever; the grandfathered toll roads are actually some of the few places where they're visible.

Uh...what? I'm hard pressed to think of an interstate highway without billboards. They are certainly everywhere along the southern and western interstates I frequent, unless it's passing through a residential area or something.

Even in much of the Northeast I wouldn't call them uncommon. I-290 north of Buffalo (https://goo.gl/maps/Q7uiHrzZXoRHeUGu7) has a ton of them, for example. Four states ban billboards.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 06:54:14 PM

E- You *could* be a little nicer. I didn't expect such unfriendly remarks.

Your comment is the first unfriendly comment I've seen.  Answering your questions, providing factual information, disagreeing with your assessments and/or correcting wrongful statements should not be construed as being unfriendly.  It's what this forum is here for. It can be used as a learning tool and you'll get correct information from these road geeks so as to not repeat the series of mistakes and/or false assumptions you recently made while traveling.  So it's up to you.  You can either bite the hand that feeds you or embrace this community.

Well, I can at least commiserate with the OP in a few regards.

I don't like toll roads either, they are kind of an oddity. Honestly I would be quite happy if tomorrow the Fed stepped in and said no more toll roads, we are just going to pay for this in our regular tax bill. No more transponders, tags, bills in the mail, roads that poorly interface with what is around them because they have to worry about billing everyone getting on or off, etc. The fact that they "pre-date" the interstate is an excuse, we could have gotten rid of all of them long ago and integrated them into the interstate system.

Two, regarding the bill board issue. The beautification act has largely backfired. Instead of moderately sized bill boards in the right of way of the actual road way, we have enormous billboards on private property in view of the road way. Frankly, it really did not help in the long run.

Three, regarding service plazas. They were supposed to be on ALL interstates, but the lawsuits filed by some special interest groups prevented that and left us with the bad system we have now.

Four, regarding rest areas. Many of these have closed, states usually claim no one is using them but I find that to be an excuse as well. The real causes are A) the expense, which apparently we had no issue affording back in the day but now we are too broke, B) the crime issues, because we are unwilling to crack down on the few criminal miscreants that belong behind bars or in front of a squad, so we let them ruin them for every traveler.

Five, to tie the preceding together, I would propose we get rid of toll roads, and the beautification act, and put up some billboards on the public right of way and auction the adverting off. Likewise, let's build service plazas and auction the franchise rights to them. And then let's take the money made from the billboards and plazas to pay for more rest areas and make up the lost revenue from tolls.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:12:55 PM
Well, I can at least commiserate with the OP in a few regards.

I don't like toll roads either, they are kind of an oddity. Honestly I would be quite happy if tomorrow the Fed stepped in and said no more toll roads, we are just going to pay for this in our regular tax bill. No more transponders, tags, bills in the mail, roads that poorly interface with what is around them because they have to worry about billing everyone getting on or off, etc. The fact that they "pre-date" the interstate is an excuse, we could have gotten rid of all of them long ago and integrated them into the interstate system.

This would break the Oklahoma transportation network–our gas tax is too low to construct new freeways, and can't be raised because of a boneheaded constitutional amendment that requires a supermajority in both houses of the Legislature to raise taxes. (But not to lower them. Funny, that.) ODOT is also not allowed to issue bonds.

I have a toll road as part of my regular commute. In exchange for 70¢/round trip I get an 80 mph speed limit and get to bypass a bunch of 45 mph county roads. Doesn't really bother me any.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:12:55 PM
Two, regarding the bill board issue. The beautification act has largely backfired. Instead of moderately sized bill boards in the right of way of the actual road way, we have enormous billboards on private property in view of the road way. Frankly, it really did not help in the long run. [...] I would propose we get rid of toll roads, and the beautification act, and put up some billboards on the public right of way and auction the adverting off. Likewise, let's build service plazas and auction the franchise rights to them. And then let's take the money made from the billboards and plazas to pay for more rest areas and make up the lost revenue from tolls.

I'd rather keep the toll roads and make the remaining billboards illegal. I'm driving because I want to go somewhere, not because I want to be subjected to some rich asshole putting up signs begging for more money. Go panhandle someone else.

I wouldn't mind having more service plazas with businesses on free roads. They have them on free roads in other countries (like the UK and I think Japan) and they work just fine there. And of course, there's still businesses at interchanges if you don't like the options at the service plaza.

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 27, 2021, 11:25:18 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:12:55 PM
Well, I can at least commiserate with the OP in a few regards.

I don't like toll roads either, they are kind of an oddity. Honestly I would be quite happy if tomorrow the Fed stepped in and said no more toll roads, we are just going to pay for this in our regular tax bill. No more transponders, tags, bills in the mail, roads that poorly interface with what is around them because they have to worry about billing everyone getting on or off, etc. The fact that they "pre-date" the interstate is an excuse, we could have gotten rid of all of them long ago and integrated them into the interstate system.

This would break the Oklahoma transportation network–our gas tax is too low to construct new freeways, and can't be raised because of a boneheaded constitutional amendment that requires a supermajority in both houses of the Legislature to raise taxes. (But not to lower them. Funny, that.) ODOT is also not allowed to issue bonds.

I have a toll road as part of my regular commute. In exchange for 70¢/round trip I get an 80 mph speed limit and get to bypass a bunch of 45 mph county roads. Doesn't really bother me any.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:12:55 PM
Two, regarding the bill board issue. The beautification act has largely backfired. Instead of moderately sized bill boards in the right of way of the actual road way, we have enormous billboards on private property in view of the road way. Frankly, it really did not help in the long run. [...] I would propose we get rid of toll roads, and the beautification act, and put up some billboards on the public right of way and auction the adverting off. Likewise, let's build service plazas and auction the franchise rights to them. And then let's take the money made from the billboards and plazas to pay for more rest areas and make up the lost revenue from tolls.

I'd rather keep the toll roads and make the remaining billboards illegal. I'm driving because I want to go somewhere, not because I want to be subjected to some rich asshole putting up signs begging for more money. Go panhandle someone else.

I wouldn't mind having more service plazas with businesses on free roads. They have them on free roads in other countries (like the UK and I think Japan) and they work just fine there. And of course, there's still businesses at interchanges if you don't like the options at the service plaza.

My proposal would not break anything. I am not suggesting states raise gas taxes, but that the federal government raise taxes and pay for the roads that way. Roads are a public good, the cost of providing them should be spread over the entire nation. Problem solved.
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 06:54:14 PM
A- I am a SHE
B- I grew up in New Jersey
C- I have crossed the country more times than I could count, I just don't use interstates if I can help it. I've motorcycled it, driven it and walked a good part of it as well. Now I won't use interstates again.
D- They interstates I HAVE traveled were not toll roads, except a couple in NJ. I'm pushing sixty so perhaps I predate some of you.
E- You *could* be a little nicer. I didn't expect such unfriendly remarks.

Do you all think the plazas are a good idea? With no shade nor place to rest? Appalling idea. JMHO. I'm sticking to US highways.

I don't think anyone is intentionally being rude.  I think you are stating things as fact that are either inaccurate or clearly opinion - and they are pointing that out.  They are also a tad skeptical that you are from the east coast, driven all over the place, and only just realized that the PA turnpike is tolled.

I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here. She could have thought of the Pennsylvania Turnpike as its own road instead of also being I-76 (I believe turnpikes used to be signed as turnpikes and less as Interstates until recently).

Of note: Draw a straight line between Chicago and DC. For the most part, the only toll road Interstates are northeast of this line. In states southwest of this line, the toll roads are only non-Interstates and occasionally bridges.

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM
Of note: Draw a straight line between Chicago and DC. For the most part, the only toll road Interstates are northeast of this line. In states southwest of this line, the toll roads are only non-Interstates and occasionally bridges.

Kansas Turnpike with I-35/335/70? All the Oklahoma Turnpikes I-44 is on?

Quote from: SkyPesos on September 28, 2021, 09:03:21 AM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM
Of note: Draw a straight line between Chicago and DC. For the most part, the only toll road Interstates are northeast of this line. In states southwest of this line, the toll roads are only non-Interstates and occasionally bridges.

Kansas Turnpike with I-35/335/70? All the Oklahoma Turnpikes I-44 is on?

Sorry. I forgot about those.

Whether they're rest areas or service areas, the point (to me) is that one needs to get out and stretch for a few minutes.  Just a 5-minute stop can reinvigorate me, especially if the air is crisp.

It's also important to stop periodically so that you don't blood clots, a tight/sore back.  Whether it's at a rest area or service area makes no difference to me.  If I'm not on a toll road and need a quick hit of caffeine and a stretch, I just skip the rest area and go to Pilot or something like that.

On the Indiana Toll Road (random VMB's) and Ontario Highway 401 (especially westbound past London), there are signs that suggest taking a break, especially when drowsy.  Whether it's a plug for the service areas on both highways is a moot point.  The key is safety.

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM
I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here. She could have thought of the Pennsylvania Turnpike as its own road instead of also being I-76 (I believe turnpikes used to be signed as turnpikes and less as Interstates until recently).

Of note: Draw a straight line between Chicago and DC. For the most part, the only toll road Interstates are northeast of this line. In states southwest of this line, the toll roads are only non-Interstates and occasionally bridges.

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

I was thinking that with the NJ Turnpike, given the she says she's from NJ.  Their signage of I-95 was abysmal until recently, so someone could be forgiven for thinking that none of it was an interstate.  The Thruway has always been prominently signed as I-87 and I-90, but she might not have gone by that way prior to the trips that generated these complaints; the I-90 portion in particular is out of the way from anywhere on the NEC.

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 09:32:29 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on September 28, 2021, 09:03:21 AM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM
Of note: Draw a straight line between Chicago and DC. For the most part, the only toll road Interstates are northeast of this line. In states southwest of this line, the toll roads are only non-Interstates and occasionally bridges.

Kansas Turnpike with I-35/335/70? All the Oklahoma Turnpikes I-44 is on?

Sorry. I forgot about those.

both of those predate the modern interstate system just like the northeast's toll roads. it is fair to say no interstate planned or in progress will ever be a toll road. I would have not thought about the Kansas turnpike or oklahoma turnpikes either because they're so far away from the other tolled interstates.

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them. Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

Quote from: ctkatz on September 29, 2021, 11:11:20 AM
it is fair to say no interstate planned or in progress will ever be a toll road.

I-240 (OK)

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 11:45:58 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them.

No, not major cities. Just Philadelphia. Every other city won't have them.

Quote
Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

First Amendment

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2021, 11:51:46 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 11:45:58 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them.

No, not major cities. Just Philadelphia. Every other city won't have them.

Quote
Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

First Amendment

My view is that the first amendment does not apply here, its no different than broadcast TV, there are some things the FCC won't let you air, side of a public road should be no different.And if the court says otherwise, just pull a Jackson or a Lincoln and ignore them.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 11:45:58 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them. Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

Why?  They are all legal products. 

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 29, 2021, 12:22:08 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 11:45:58 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them. Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

Why?  They are all legal products.

So are cigarettes, but those are not advertised on TV either.
And I would also be happy if this highway bill got a rider that made all of them illegal as well, killing four birds with one stone if you will.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 12:43:22 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 29, 2021, 12:22:08 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 11:45:58 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 28, 2021, 12:27:24 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 27, 2021, 11:33:01 PM
And sure, an road with a speed limit of 80 is great, but one paid for by billboard revenue rather than my wallet is even better.

As long as all of the billboards are in Philadelphia and none anywhere else, sure.

I would be okay with restricting them to the millage near significant cities/exits and not plastering the entire road with them. Then again, the last time I was in OK all the billboards were for casinos, weed, or adult play stores, none of which would be allowed to advertise in my conception of this.

Why?  They are all legal products.

So are cigarettes, but those are not advertised on TV either.
And I would also be happy if this highway bill got a rider that made all of them illegal as well, killing four birds with one stone if you will.

I understand that.  And I understand that billboards can be regulated because they aren't covered by the First Amendment.

I just don't understand why you want to limit who can advertise on them.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM
:ded:


1) It seems many of the billboards are gone. Yes they're ugly, but they're something to look at, they give you an idea what's "out there", what motels, restaurants, casinos, whatever are nearby. Plus, they keep a driver alert, like the old Burma Shave signs.

Were you around for Burma Shave signs?

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM

I got a very unsettled feeling driving the NY Thruway. I lost concept of where I was, the interstate is completely homogenous, just trees, no signs, so I didn't know where I was, nor could I get any inkling of what was beyond the trees, no signs told me Betty's Diner with Famous Blueberry Tarts was there, or a Navaho Casino, or a Howard Johnson's. It actually triggered a panic attack.

I find it odd that you find the NY Thruway desolate to the point of a panic attack but you didn't feel that way driving across Wyoming or the Dakotas or anything. Though I love the Plains States, I would much rather drive the Thruway instead of I-80 across Nebraska.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM

I have always loved the shaded loop rest areas. I actually do rest in them. At the right time of day one can find shadows from trees, and park there, open a window, kick back and take a 30 minute nap. I usually walk around the sidewalks and paths to help wake myself up (if there's hope) or stick my feet out the window and snooze awhile. That is completely impossible at the service plazas.

The New York Thruway has plenty of these type of rest areas, albeit without a rest room. Plus, there's a few Tourist Gateway Centers and the like that offer this exact sort of thing as well.

Quote from: SMoon on September 27, 2021, 04:11:20 AM

When I was young, a toll road was a luxury, and a CHOICE. You could take the regular interstate, or chose a toll parkway and not contend with commercial vehicles or excessive exits. Now, people who drive a lot are going to have to take secondary roads so as not to have to pay tolls. The Eisenhower System was paid for by us all, with fuel taxes (and probably other taxes as well) Now those same taxpayers may not be able to use the system, and people like me WON'T use it anymore since I cannot stand the new system, and why the heck am I being charged for something I hate, didn't want, and provides drivers no safe place to rest??

I don't understand why you're calling the Toll Roads a "new" system. They're older than the Interstate system and were grandfathered in.



As I think it was Rothman that said, something weird is going on here.  Perhaps you should stick to walking like you suggested in your original post.

Quote from: ctkatz on September 29, 2021, 11:11:20 AM
it is fair to say no interstate planned or in progress will ever be a toll road.

I-490 in Illinois begs to differ.

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:23:58 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

The other major problem is that there are some "reliable sources" that are cited in Wikipedia, but those sources had themselves been written based on unverified Wikipedia content that often still had "citation needed" tags on it. In other words, a circular reference.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:23:58 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

Wikipedia was never known as a great place, and was always known as a place where anyone can write anything with limited factual basis. That's why the needed citations in the first place.

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:37:39 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:23:58 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

The other major problem is that there are some "reliable sources" that are cited in Wikipedia, but those sources had themselves been written based on unverified Wikipedia content that often still had "citation needed" tags on it. In other words, a circular reference.

Of course, the problem is, as a Wikipedia editor, how do you ferret that out? This is especially a problem with newspapers, which need to be treated as a reliable source or else the whole damn site would be empty, but newspapers rarely cite their sources for background information, so the only way it can be detected is if they outright copy and paste from the article–which I've seen The Oklahoman do with text that I remember writing myself!

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2021, 08:42:24 PM
Wikipedia was never known as a great place, and was always known as a place where anyone can write anything with limited factual basis.

[citation needed]

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2021, 08:49:43 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:37:39 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:23:58 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

The other major problem is that there are some "reliable sources" that are cited in Wikipedia, but those sources had themselves been written based on unverified Wikipedia content that often still had "citation needed" tags on it. In other words, a circular reference.

Of course, the problem is, as a Wikipedia editor, how do you ferret that out? This is especially a problem with newspapers, which need to be treated as a reliable source or else the whole damn site would be empty, but newspapers rarely cite their sources for background information, so the only way it can be detected is if they outright copy and paste from the article–which I've seen The Oklahoman do with text that I remember writing myself!

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2021, 08:42:24 PM
Wikipedia was never known as a great place, and was always known as a place where anyone can write anything with limited factual basis.

[citation needed]

Newspapers have never been reliable sources, they are about as informative as a roll of Charmin, and significantly less absorbent.

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2021, 08:49:43 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:37:39 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:23:58 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on September 29, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 28, 2021, 08:55:54 AM

For the people replying to this thread: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers (which applies to any community).

Wikipedia is terrible at following its own advice in that regard.

Wikipedia was at one time a great place, I don't go there nearly as much as I used to, NPOV went out the window a while ago.

The other major problem is that there are some "reliable sources" that are cited in Wikipedia, but those sources had themselves been written based on unverified Wikipedia content that often still had "citation needed" tags on it. In other words, a circular reference.

Of course, the problem is, as a Wikipedia editor, how do you ferret that out? This is especially a problem with newspapers, which need to be treated as a reliable source or else the whole damn site would be empty, but newspapers rarely cite their sources for background information, so the only way it can be detected is if they outright copy and paste from the article–which I've seen The Oklahoman do with text that I remember writing myself!

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2021, 08:42:24 PM
Wikipedia was never known as a great place, and was always known as a place where anyone can write anything with limited factual basis.

[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source    :-D

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:51:23 PM
Newspapers have never been reliable sources, they are about as informative as a roll of Charmin, and significantly less absorbent.

That's not what "reliable source" on Wikipedia means. A "reliable source" is merely a professionally-published independent source that can be assumed to have some degree of fact-checking oversight. That is, basically, sources that aren't things like blog posts, forum posts, personal websites, social media posts, etc.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2021, 09:02:27 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source    :-D

That page uses the Wikipedia definition of "reliable source", as described above.

Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 27, 2021, 06:37:59 PM
I was surprised at the number of billboards in Montana compared with Washington, or maybe I'm just used to the billboards close to home.  Maybe some states are more lax about enforcing billboard bans.

Other than the cluster of billboards at the King-Pierce line in Federal Way, the urban sections of interstates in the Seattle area are relatively tidy. There's only a handful I can think of on I-5 (Smokey Point, Boeing Field, JBLM) where they crop up.

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2021, 09:22:30 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 29, 2021, 08:51:23 PM
Newspapers have never been reliable sources, they are about as informative as a roll of Charmin, and significantly less absorbent.

That's not what "reliable source" on Wikipedia means. A "reliable source" is merely a professionally-published independent source that can be assumed to have some degree of fact-checking oversight. That is, basically, sources that aren't things like blog posts, forum posts, personal websites, social media posts, etc.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2021, 09:02:27 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source    :-D

That page uses the Wikipedia definition of "reliable source", as described above.

Except when you have media outlets running stories based on information strictly from unnamed sources.

Happened yesterday. An online source broke a story that an elected official in an upper midwestern state is having an affair with an aide to a former high-level federal official. The story was based solely on anonymous unnamed sources, with no evidence presented. How can that story be cited in any way as a source for anything when it was based on anonymous rumors and innuendo?

Quote from: hbelkins on September 30, 2021, 11:59:50 AM
Except when you have media outlets running stories based on information strictly from unnamed sources.

Happened yesterday. An online source broke a story that an elected official in an upper midwestern state is having an affair with an aide to a former high-level federal official. The story was based solely on anonymous unnamed sources, with no evidence presented. How can that story be cited in any way as a source for anything when it was based on anonymous rumors and innuendo?

1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.
2. Only certain news websites are acceptable as sources (and some are acceptable in some situations and not others). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources)
3. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies%20of%20living%20persons) creates greater restrictions on sources for living people and those who have been dead for fewer than 6 months.

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM
No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

...And the people that do write whatever they please do so on the sorts of platforms that are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia.

Quote from: Scott5114 on September 30, 2021, 02:29:26 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM
No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

...And the people that do write whatever they please do so on the sorts of platforms that are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia.

Yep.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

LOL. "a reputable news source" is about as hard to find as a true Scotsman.

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:13:00 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

LOL. "a reputable news source" is about as hard to find as a true Scotsman.

Not really, but keep being you.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 03:33:17 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:13:00 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

LOL. "a reputable news source" is about as hard to find as a true Scotsman.

Not really, but keep being you.

When a man is too lazy to work, and too cowardly to steal, he becomes and "editor" and manufactures public opinion. –W.T. Sherman

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:38:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 03:33:17 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:13:00 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

LOL. "a reputable news source" is about as hard to find as a true Scotsman.

Not really, but keep being you.

When a man is too lazy to work, and too cowardly to steal, he becomes and "editor" and manufactures public opinion. –W.T. Sherman

Yes, no greater authority on the journalism professional than a Civil War general.   :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:38:10 PM
When a man is too lazy to work, and too cowardly to steal, he becomes and "editor" and manufactures public opinion. –W.T. Sherman

When a man is unwilling to actually research real sources, both for things he agrees and disagrees with, he says that everything is fake news. - Me

Chris

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 03:42:13 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:38:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 03:33:17 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:13:00 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2021, 01:22:57 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 30, 2021, 12:05:34 PM
1. Anonymous to the public doesn't mean anonymous to the person writing the article.

Perhaps not, but at the same time there is zero possibility of verifying the information. Anonymous sources is a license to write whatever they please. As soon as I see that, I close the article.

That's actually pretty false and a misunderstanding of the practice of journalism.  No one who runs a reputable news service fails to verify the information provided, even through anonymous sources.  No one "writes whatever they please" in these cases.

LOL. "a reputable news source" is about as hard to find as a true Scotsman.

Not really, but keep being you.

When a man is too lazy to work, and too cowardly to steal, he becomes and "editor" and manufactures public opinion. –W.T. Sherman

Yes, no greater authority on the journalism professional than a Civil War general.   :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

The man hated journalism and for good reason. A real prolific source of quotes about the so called "profession".

Quote from: HighwayStar on September 30, 2021, 03:38:10 PM

When a man is too lazy to work, and too cowardly to steal, he becomes and "editor" and manufactures public opinion. –W.T. Sherman

As a Georgian I have mixed opinions about Sherman, but I certainly agree with that quote.

Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 27, 2021, 06:32:18 PM
The Ladybird Johnson Highway Beautification Act limits the number and density of billboards on interstate highways.

Interstate 15 South of Salt Lake City says, "Hold My Beer"...

As for the original topic, I agree that service plazas are not ideal, especially because they are arbitrarily limited in terms of having a certain number of restaurant/fuel businesses in a space with such easy access off and on (with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits), but I do think there should be more roads built that allow drivers to easily exit, reach a business, and easily re-enter.

For example, maybe the on and off ramps at interchanges with many services could be lengthened so that drivers that only want a service and not the intersecting road, can simply use an off ramp and an on ramp and not have to deal with the cross road. (Which would be a first step to eventually just building frontage roads along most freeways)

Quote from: ran4sh on November 07, 2021, 12:56:05 AM
As for the original topic, I agree that service plazas are not ideal, especially because they are arbitrarily limited in terms of having a certain number of restaurant/fuel businesses in a space with such easy access off and on (with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits), but I do think there should be more roads built that allow drivers to easily exit, reach a business, and easily re-enter.

For example, maybe the on and off ramps at interchanges with many services could be lengthened so that drivers that only want a service and not the intersecting road, can simply use an off ramp and an on ramp and not have to deal with the cross road. (Which would be a first step to eventually just building frontage roads along most freeways)

I fail to see your point.

because they are arbitrarily limited it is not "arbitrary" it is a matter of scaling to the size that is reasonable for the traffic the road carries, the spacing of the plazas, and what can still be an easy in/out solution.

with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits So? Pricing should easily take care of that issue. Since service plaza real estate has less supply, the equilibrium price for it should be higher, which goes hand in hand with being more convenient. Business not in the service plaza pay less for the real estate hence they pay more to acquire customers. Not an issue at all.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 08, 2021, 01:42:49 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on November 07, 2021, 12:56:05 AM
As for the original topic, I agree that service plazas are not ideal, especially because they are arbitrarily limited in terms of having a certain number of restaurant/fuel businesses in a space with such easy access off and on (with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits), but I do think there should be more roads built that allow drivers to easily exit, reach a business, and easily re-enter.

For example, maybe the on and off ramps at interchanges with many services could be lengthened so that drivers that only want a service and not the intersecting road, can simply use an off ramp and an on ramp and not have to deal with the cross road. (Which would be a first step to eventually just building frontage roads along most freeways)

I fail to see your point.

because they are arbitrarily limited it is not "arbitrary" it is a matter of scaling to the size that is reasonable for the traffic the road carries, the spacing of the plazas, and what can still be an easy in/out solution.

with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits So? Pricing should easily take care of that issue. Since service plaza real estate has less supply, the equilibrium price for it should be higher, which goes hand in hand with being more convenient. Business not in the service plaza pay less for the real estate hence they pay more to acquire customers. Not an issue at all.

You're referring to a single service plaza. I'm referring to the availability of them overall on any given system.

Quote from: ran4sh on November 08, 2021, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 08, 2021, 01:42:49 PM

Quote from: ran4sh on November 07, 2021, 12:56:05 AM
As for the original topic, I agree that service plazas are not ideal, especially because they are arbitrarily limited in terms of having a certain number of restaurant/fuel businesses in a space with such easy access off and on (with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits), but I do think there should be more roads built that allow drivers to easily exit, reach a business, and easily re-enter.

For example, maybe the on and off ramps at interchanges with many services could be lengthened so that drivers that only want a service and not the intersecting road, can simply use an off ramp and an on ramp and not have to deal with the cross road. (Which would be a first step to eventually just building frontage roads along most freeways)

I fail to see your point.

because they are arbitrarily limited it is not "arbitrary" it is a matter of scaling to the size that is reasonable for the traffic the road carries, the spacing of the plazas, and what can still be an easy in/out solution.

with other businesses relegated to being located at the exits So? Pricing should easily take care of that issue. Since service plaza real estate has less supply, the equilibrium price for it should be higher, which goes hand in hand with being more convenient. Business not in the service plaza pay less for the real estate hence they pay more to acquire customers. Not an issue at all.

You're referring to a single service plaza. I'm referring to the availability of them overall on any given system.

No, nowhere do I say a single service plaza. The argument follows for 1, 10, or 100. In any case the spacing of them is usually such that competition between plazas is fairly minimal.

There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Then, shouldn't the gas station leases be bid out as well?

I'm not sure how I feel about a government-sanctioned monopoly on the highways. If I'm traveling, I will probably take the time to exit a free freeway for cheaper gas, or a restaurant with a full menu that honors chain-wide deals, than use a service plaza where the captive audience is gouged on gas prices, or there's a Restaurant Express that does not have the same menu that the places with the same brand on the side roads offer, or accepts the coupons that sometimes appear in the local newspaper.

IIRC, Pizza Hut Express offers a very limited menu as opposed to a regular Pizza Hut. Why would I stop somewhere that only serves pepperoni and supreme personal pan pizzas if I want one with sausage, pepperoni, ham, and ground beef toppings?

I understand the deployment of service plazas on closed-system toll roads, and can actually understand why one was built on the open-system Western Kentucky Parkway because the road originally ran through pretty much 140 miles of nothing (commercial facilities have been built in intervening years in communities along the route like Princeton, Central City, Beaver Dam, and Leitchfield), but there's really no need to have one on an interstate, where property owners and developers can pretty much put any in-demand service provider at an interchange.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2021, 02:56:39 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Then, shouldn't the gas station leases be bid out as well?

I'm not sure how I feel about a government-sanctioned monopoly on the highways. If I'm traveling, I will probably take the time to exit a free freeway for cheaper gas, or a restaurant with a full menu that honors chain-wide deals, than use a service plaza where the captive audience is gouged on gas prices, or there's a Restaurant Express that does not have the same menu that the places with the same brand on the side roads offer, or accepts the coupons that sometimes appear in the local newspaper.

IIRC, Pizza Hut Express offers a very limited menu as opposed to a regular Pizza Hut. Why would I stop somewhere that only serves pepperoni and supreme personal pan pizzas if I want one with sausage, pepperoni, ham, and ground beef toppings?

I understand the deployment of service plazas on closed-system toll roads, and can actually understand why one was built on the open-system Western Kentucky Parkway because the road originally ran through pretty much 140 miles of nothing (commercial facilities have been built in intervening years in communities along the route like Princeton, Central City, Beaver Dam, and Leitchfield), but there's really no need to have one on an interstate, where property owners and developers can pretty much put any in-demand service provider at an interchange.

Yes, I left that out in the name of brevity, but a number of leasing arrangements are possible.

This is not a "monopoly", there is not a single firm selling the good or service. Auctioning off a limited amount of real estate for limited periods is not creating a monopoly.

You can travel however you please, but many travelers will prefer the convenience, and the market will deal with that in the form of an equilibrium.

It is going too far to assume what kind of menu/deal honoring, etc. will be present, that is a matter for the market to determine.

"GoUgInG" is not a real concept in economics.

The limited menu's we see now are largely a reflection of the market and for good reason, travelers just need some kind of food, people are not looking for a four course gourmet meal, and the missing menu items likely don't bother that many people.

Service plazas are far more convenient than an interchange, and are the way the system was going to be built until special interest groups stopped it. Bush Jr. actually tried to reverse that in his time but was stopped by special interest groups again. From the perspective of the traveling public, service plazas are simply superior to interchanges with services from a convenience standpoint, and from the policymakers view they generate revenue directly and in quantity, which businesses off interchanges do only indirectly and at a lower rate.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2021, 02:56:39 PM
I'm not sure how I feel about a government-sanctioned monopoly on the highways.

It's not a monopoly if you can drive past it and get off at an interchange to visit a competing business. The service plaza just makes things more convenient. If the businesses at the plaza are overcharging, you could still visit a traditional interchange.

I think service plazas would make a lot of sense in places like I-70 between Limon and Salina, where the free market hasn't really done a whole lot to encourage services at the interchanges anyway.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2021, 03:38:38 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2021, 02:56:39 PM
I'm not sure how I feel about a government-sanctioned monopoly on the highways.

It's not a monopoly if you can drive past it and get off at an interchange to visit a competing business. The service plaza just makes things more convenient. If the businesses at the plaza are overcharging, you could still visit a traditional interchange.

I think service plazas would make a lot of sense in places like I-70 between Limon and Salina, where the free market hasn't really done a whole lot to encourage services at the interchanges anyway.

To add to that point, I have seen many cases where a new truck stop has met with stiff local opposition. People don't want them by their exits, and I don't blame them in the slightest.
Service plazas, which confine the traffic, noise, crime, etc. for the most part to the highway, with no link to local roads, resolve most of this issue.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2021, 02:56:39 PM
IIRC, Pizza Hut Express offers a very limited menu as opposed to a regular Pizza Hut. Why would I stop somewhere that only serves pepperoni and supreme personal pan pizzas if I want one with sausage, pepperoni, ham, and ground beef toppings?

I actually prefer Pizza Hut Express over regular Pizza Hut when traveling.  One is a grab and go place that fits in perfectly with service areas where you get something from a counter and then go to the seating area or back to your car.  The other is a sit-down/takeout restaurant.  When I'm on the road, I'm not doing sit-down restaurants (closest I'll come is stuff like Panera Bread, but still, that's just food delivered to the table, not full blown table service), and a local pizza place will have better pizza anyways.  I think I actually like the pizza and breadsticks from the Express over getting takeout from a regular one, too.  Not sure why they'd taste different (especially the breadsticks), but they do.  I could see limited menu being an issue for places that are traditionally fast food/fast casual rather than a sit-down place adapting to a service plaza or food court, however.

Anybody know how Ontario regulates the service plazas along it's freeways -- I know there are such facilities on at the least the 401 between Windsor and London.

Quote from: vdeane on November 09, 2021, 08:06:56 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2021, 02:56:39 PM
IIRC, Pizza Hut Express offers a very limited menu as opposed to a regular Pizza Hut. Why would I stop somewhere that only serves pepperoni and supreme personal pan pizzas if I want one with sausage, pepperoni, ham, and ground beef toppings?

I actually prefer Pizza Hut Express over regular Pizza Hut when traveling.  One is a grab and go place that fits in perfectly with service areas where you get something from a counter and then go to the seating area or back to your car.  The other is a sit-down/takeout restaurant.  When I'm on the road, I'm not doing sit-down restaurants (closest I'll come is stuff like Panera Bread, but still, that's just food delivered to the table, not full blown table service), and a local pizza place will have better pizza anyways.  I think I actually like the pizza and breadsticks from the Express over getting takeout from a regular one, too.  Not sure why they'd taste different (especially the breadsticks), but they do.  I could see limited menu being an issue for places that are traditionally fast food/fast casual rather than a sit-down place adapting to a service plaza or food court, however.

This.

While some people complain about how service plaza restaurants operate etc. its worth noting that they are generally optimized for profitability in that market. Most travelers want speed above all else, except perhaps some minimal level of taste and cleanliness. Complaining that you cannot order the McSoufflé or Pizza Hut Extra Large Chicago Style Extreme Deep Dish Meatlovers Suffed Crust Family Feast misses the point, most people will not miss it, and most looking to be that discerning should look for a restaurant not attached to a gas station anyway.

How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

There's a service plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike not too far east of Bedford. We stopped there at the most recent abandoned turnpike tunnels/Breezewood meet. However, right at the end of the exit ramp at the Bedford interchange, is a Sheetz. All things being equal, I'd rather exit the turnpike and go to Sheetz for gas and food, than use the service plaza and have Steak 'n' Shake (which I think was the main restaurant there at the time). But if the PTC makes it so that I'm going to have to pay extra to fuel and dine at my preferred establishment on my way to Harrisburg, instead of staying on the turnpike and paying inflated prices for the service plaza's gas and not getting the food I want, it's not exactly an ideal situation.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

There's a service plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike not too far east of Bedford. We stopped there at the most recent abandoned turnpike tunnels/Breezewood meet. However, right at the end of the exit ramp at the Bedford interchange, is a Sheetz. All things being equal, I'd rather exit the turnpike and go to Sheetz for gas and food, than use the service plaza and have Steak 'n' Shake (which I think was the main restaurant there at the time). But if the PTC makes it so that I'm going to have to pay extra to fuel and dine at my preferred establishment on my way to Harrisburg, instead of staying on the turnpike and paying inflated prices for the service plaza's gas and not getting the food I want, it's not exactly an ideal situation.

Even if there is no charge for getting on and off it is far less convenient than just pulling into the service plaza. Not to mention the externalities imposed on locals by having their exit turned into a Flying J hub.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 02:36:46 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

There's a service plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike not too far east of Bedford. We stopped there at the most recent abandoned turnpike tunnels/Breezewood meet. However, right at the end of the exit ramp at the Bedford interchange, is a Sheetz. All things being equal, I'd rather exit the turnpike and go to Sheetz for gas and food, than use the service plaza and have Steak 'n' Shake (which I think was the main restaurant there at the time). But if the PTC makes it so that I'm going to have to pay extra to fuel and dine at my preferred establishment on my way to Harrisburg, instead of staying on the turnpike and paying inflated prices for the service plaza's gas and not getting the food I want, it's not exactly an ideal situation.

Even if there is no charge for getting on and off it is far less convenient than just pulling into the service plaza. Not to mention the externalities imposed on locals by having their exit turned into a Flying J hub.

Convenience is relative. I'd be more inconvenienced by paying more for gas, or by having to settle for food I didn't want, than by getting off the freeway to get what I want and then get back on.

And I've noticed that a lot of truck stops are locating at very rural exits where they don't really impose upon anyone but the cattle or the cornstalks in the nearby fields.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

There's a service plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike not too far east of Bedford. We stopped there at the most recent abandoned turnpike tunnels/Breezewood meet. However, right at the end of the exit ramp at the Bedford interchange, is a Sheetz. All things being equal, I'd rather exit the turnpike and go to Sheetz for gas and food, than use the service plaza and have Steak 'n' Shake (which I think was the main restaurant there at the time). But if the PTC makes it so that I'm going to have to pay extra to fuel and dine at my preferred establishment on my way to Harrisburg, instead of staying on the turnpike and paying inflated prices for the service plaza's gas and not getting the food I want, it's not exactly an ideal situation.

What I do to avoid this with the Kansas Turnpike is to simply fuel up in Emporia, after I've already exited the turnpike for the day (or before I get on it). I'm less willing to put off food for that long, though, so usually we'll eat at the Belle Plaine service plaza (which is conveniently co-located with a tourism information center, so I can get the latest KDOT official map) or the Matfield Greene plaza–never Towanda, as it seems to be the plaza of choice for buses, so we've had bad experiences with wait times there. The restaurants are known quantities (McDonalds at Belle Plaine and Towanda, Hardee's at Matfield Green), they don't charge noticeably more than off-turnpike restaurants, and there's not much at the actual interchanges on the turnpike anyway, so getting off to do business and get back on is not very tempting.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Mind on Baltimore again :sombrero: as that city has one on I-95 north of the Fort McHenry Tunnel.

It would be nice though, but its only going to work in state's like Wyoming, Montana, Eastern Colorado, and possibly West Texas.  The east coast and most everything east of the Mississippi, there are way too many exits and population centers within easy drive of each other to make it happen.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

If you do the math, you'll find that on a surprisingly large amount of toll roads, an exit and re-entry will cost you more than a straight-through trip.

But... that is usually not by a huge margin...maybe a dollar or two at most? You're probably spending that much more paying the convenience factor inflated prices at the service plaza anyway.

Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2021, 06:31:16 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Mind on Baltimore again :sombrero: as that city has one on I-95 north of the Fort McHenry Tunnel.

It would be nice though, but its only going to work in state's like Wyoming, Montana, Eastern Colorado, and possibly West Texas.  The east coast and most everything east of the Mississippi, there are way too many exits and population centers within easy drive of each other to make it happen.

You have it backwards.
Most of the states where this is extant now are the opposite of Wyoming, Montana, Texas, etc. The states that have service plazas are densely populated, relatively wealthy, eastern states with high population densities and traffic volumes.

Why?
First, because as traffic gets worse the penalty for leaving the freeway gets worse. In Montana getting off the highway is not an issue, but doing that in NY, CT, MA, etc. is frequently a major headache.
Second, high traffic counts and relative prosperity increase the demand for goods and services along the roadway to support more options.
Third, high land values make private truck stops comparatively expensive to run due to capital costs.

The presence of exists and population centers does nothing to eliminate the need for service areas, if anything it makes them significantly more convenient.

Finally, in conjunction with building these along the freeway, various other taxes, regulations, and incentives could be used to discourage the use off highway options as they create negative externalities for the locals.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 06:15:48 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 02:36:46 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 10, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
How many toll roads charge a penalty for exit and re-entry vs. a straight-through trip?

There's a service plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike not too far east of Bedford. We stopped there at the most recent abandoned turnpike tunnels/Breezewood meet. However, right at the end of the exit ramp at the Bedford interchange, is a Sheetz. All things being equal, I'd rather exit the turnpike and go to Sheetz for gas and food, than use the service plaza and have Steak 'n' Shake (which I think was the main restaurant there at the time). But if the PTC makes it so that I'm going to have to pay extra to fuel and dine at my preferred establishment on my way to Harrisburg, instead of staying on the turnpike and paying inflated prices for the service plaza's gas and not getting the food I want, it's not exactly an ideal situation.

Even if there is no charge for getting on and off it is far less convenient than just pulling into the service plaza. Not to mention the externalities imposed on locals by having their exit turned into a Flying J hub.

Convenience is relative. I'd be more inconvenienced by paying more for gas, or by having to settle for food I didn't want, than by getting off the freeway to get what I want and then get back on.

And I've noticed that a lot of truck stops are locating at very rural exits where they don't really impose upon anyone but the cattle or the cornstalks in the nearby fields.

Try driving on the east cost where getting off the exit and back on can be an ordeal in itself. Paying an extra 10 cents for the gas costs less than idling through 4 lights.
And those truck stops are deceiving, usually there is a town that is being imposed on by them, and is simply dwarfed by their size. Major fight going on in MT not that long ago over a truck stop that wanted to move into a quiet exit with nothing but cows and fields around it, people don't want it there.

Having dealt with a bunch of NIMBYs fighting against a project I'm working on, I can tell you from experience a lot of these supposed impositions that people use as their reason for opposing things are either wild flights of fancy or complete fabrications. I had someone honest to God oppose our project because they were 100% convinced that we were going to hire armed security guards to shoot their children. (We don't have the money to hire security guards, armed or not, and besides, why would their children be jumping two fences, one of which is 8 ft tall, to get to us anyway?)

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 10, 2021, 07:57:15 PM
Having dealt with a bunch of NIMBYs fighting against a project I'm working on, I can tell you from experience a lot of these supposed impositions that people use as their reason for opposing things are either wild flights of fancy or complete fabrications. I had someone honest to God oppose our project because they were 100% convinced that we were going to hire armed security guards to shoot their children. (We don't have the money to hire security guards, armed or not, and besides, why would their children be jumping two fences, one of which is 8 ft tall, to get to us anyway?)

I hate NIMBYs with a passion, and frequently find their bitching to be absurd, but realistically putting traveler services off exits has more traffic, noise, crime, etc. issues that keeping them in the right of way of the roadway.

In my state of Florida you have many exits close together, so you do not even need them.  On I-4 we only have one car use rest area.  Originally 3, but soon as the boom from Disney and all the get rich quick developers decided to buy farm land for making money off of immigrants and people up north deciding to go where its warm and of course the previous war between Cuomo and Dick Scott due to atypical politics (as Cuomo is a Leftist and Scott is a narcist, as even though he is a Republican by party, he acts off the scale) of getting folks who hate Cuomo's left wing ideal to patronize ole Dicky's developers; we now have suburban character almost the whole length of I-4 and no longer even need them anymore.

If rest areas are dying here, a service plaza won't work either.

Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2021, 11:35:28 PM
In my state of Florida you have many exits close together, so you do not even need them.  On I-4 we only have one car use rest area.  Originally 3, but soon as the boom from Disney and all the get rich quick developers decided to buy farm land for making money off of immigrants and people up north deciding to go where its warm and of course the previous war between Cuomo and Dick Scott due to atypical politics (as Cuomo is a Leftist and Scott is a narcist, as even though he is a Republican by party, he acts off the scale) of getting folks who hate Cuomo's left wing ideal to patronize ole Dicky's developers; we now have suburban character almost the whole length of I-4 and no longer even need them anymore.

If rest areas are dying here, a service plaza won't work either.

Florida is not special in that regard, spacing of exits is not the issue. Getting off a congested exit is worse than a service plaza, having more of them does not resolve that.

And no, rest areas are not "dying" they are being killed off by the state. Major difference. Rest areas are not revenue positive, they simply are an expense with no revenue. Service plazas are very much the opposite, they produce revenue in excess of expenses that can fund other road improvements.

So on the contrary, the fact that the state has been closing rest areas out of lack of funds is indicative of why service plazas WOULD work, namely because they provide the same service, and more, but are also net revenue positive so they improve the situation.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 07:28:46 PM
Finally, in conjunction with building these along the freeway, various other taxes, regulations, and incentives could be used to discourage the use off highway options as they create negative externalities for the locals.

What taxes and regulations could be used?  And whatever it is, expect a huge fight from businesses off the highway.

Does anyone have any data on whether new businesses popped up at Mass Pike exits within the last few years? The conversion to AET, as a side effect, changed things so that it doesn't cost any more to get off and back on.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 07:28:46 PM
Finally, in conjunction with building these along the freeway, various other taxes, regulations, and incentives could be used to discourage the use off highway options as they create negative externalities for the locals.

Someone ate a dictionary for breakfast.   :colorful:

Quote from: 1 on November 11, 2021, 09:08:03 AM
Does anyone have any data on whether new businesses popped up at Mass Pike exits within the last few years? The conversion to AET, as a side effect, changed things so that it doesn't cost any more to get off and back on.

Did they change the toll rates when changing to AET?

I understand that cash rates often get rounded to a 5 cent or 10 cent increment while electronic tolling can simply use more exact rates, but it's still possible to change to AET while keeping the rounded toll rates that were used for cash tolls.

Quote from: ran4sh on November 11, 2021, 03:57:00 PM

Quote from: 1 on November 11, 2021, 09:08:03 AM
Does anyone have any data on whether new businesses popped up at Mass Pike exits within the last few years? The conversion to AET, as a side effect, changed things so that it doesn't cost any more to get off and back on.

Did they change the toll rates when changing to AET?

I understand that cash rates often get rounded to a 5 cent or 10 cent increment while electronic tolling can simply use more exact rates, but it's still possible to change to AET while keeping the rounded toll rates that were used for cash tolls.

The toll rates did change. The reason why the change I mentioned happened is because it's no longer a ticket system; it charges you a small amount for each gantry you pass through instead of calculating it based on your entry and exit point.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 07:28:46 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2021, 06:31:16 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Mind on Baltimore again :sombrero: as that city has one on I-95 north of the Fort McHenry Tunnel.

It would be nice though, but its only going to work in state's like Wyoming, Montana, Eastern Colorado, and possibly West Texas.  The east coast and most everything east of the Mississippi, there are way too many exits and population centers within easy drive of each other to make it happen.

You have it backwards.
Most of the states where this is extant now are the opposite of Wyoming, Montana, Texas, etc. The states that have service plazas are densely populated, relatively wealthy, eastern states with high population densities and traffic volumes.

And that's because they are mostly closed-system toll roads. Geography has nothing to do with it. Offhand, the only open-system toll roads I can think of are I-95 in Maryland and Delaware (the Newark service plaza, Chesapeake House, and Maryland House) and I-44 in Oklahoma. The only place I can think of that has a service plaza that isn't a toll road, other than the one on the WK Parkway here in Kentucky, is on I-395 in Connecticut, and it used to be toll.

There's a difference between self-funding toll roads that were given Interstate numbers and federally-funded Interstate highways, legislatively speaking.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 11, 2021, 07:05:23 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 10, 2021, 07:28:46 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on November 10, 2021, 06:31:16 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 09, 2021, 12:28:58 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 08:33:05 PM
There's really no reason a turnpike authority couldn't put in a food-court type of service plaza if demand allowed for it.

I guess I kind of view service plazas sort of like I do mall food courts, now that I think about it. Yes, there is a conveniently-placed restaurant there as part of the facility, but if I don't like what's on offer, there's nothing stopping me from eating elsewhere before or after I leave the facility.

Exactly. Every interstate in the country should have service plazas with gasoline, restaurants, and restrooms for travelers. The leases to the restaurant slots can be auctioned and the proceeds used to fund the roadways.

Mind on Baltimore again :sombrero: as that city has one on I-95 north of the Fort McHenry Tunnel.

It would be nice though, but its only going to work in state's like Wyoming, Montana, Eastern Colorado, and possibly West Texas.  The east coast and most everything east of the Mississippi, there are way too many exits and population centers within easy drive of each other to make it happen.

You have it backwards.
Most of the states where this is extant now are the opposite of Wyoming, Montana, Texas, etc. The states that have service plazas are densely populated, relatively wealthy, eastern states with high population densities and traffic volumes.

And that's because they are mostly closed-system toll roads. Geography has nothing to do with it. Offhand, the only open-system toll roads I can think of are I-95 in Maryland and Delaware (the Newark service plaza, Chesapeake House, and Maryland House) and I-44 in Oklahoma. The only place I can think of that has a service plaza that isn't a toll road, other than the one on the WK Parkway here in Kentucky, is on I-395 in Connecticut, and it used to be toll.

There's a difference between self-funding toll roads that were given Interstate numbers and federally-funded Interstate highways, legislatively speaking.

No, geography has a great deal to do with it.
The association between closed toll system roads is the result of a legal vestige going back to the sixties, it has nothing to do with what would be feasible outside of that.
Moreover, that is only a prerequisite to their existence, if they were not profitable they would not have survived this long. It is a necessary but not sufficient condition.

Service Plazas come in handy when it is either costly to exit and re-enter certain roads or there's few/no services in a certain area. There are Service Plazas on both Closed and Open (the entire Illinois Tollway system for example and formally the CT Tpk) toll roads, as well as on roads that were never tolled (MA outside of Masspike, and ON).

However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

Quote from: plain on November 11, 2021, 09:18:40 PM
Service Plazas come in handy when it is either costly to exit and re-enter certain roads or there's few/no services in a certain area. There are Service Plazas on both Closed and Open (the entire Illinois Tollway system for example and formally the CT Tpk) toll roads, as well as on roads that were never tolled (MA outside of Masspike, and ON).

However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

I'd imagine some levy could be made on the vendors to contribute towards the upkeep.

Quote from: plain on November 11, 2021, 09:18:40 PM
Service Plazas come in handy when it is either costly to exit and re-enter certain roads or there's few/no services in a certain area. There are Service Plazas on both Closed and Open (the entire Illinois Tollway system for example and formally the CT Tpk) toll roads, as well as on roads that were never tolled (MA outside of Masspike, and ON).

However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

Rest area closing doesn't save a whole lot of money - maybe $250,000 to $500,000 or so. They get a few miles of roadway paving out of that savings.  Most of the savings will be in salaries as they won't have employees attending to the needs of an open rest area, such as cleaning, trash, mowing and some maintenance costs, water and sewer.   

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 11, 2021, 10:17:21 PM

Quote from: plain on November 11, 2021, 09:18:40 PM
Service Plazas come in handy when it is either costly to exit and re-enter certain roads or there's few/no services in a certain area. There are Service Plazas on both Closed and Open (the entire Illinois Tollway system for example and formally the CT Tpk) toll roads, as well as on roads that were never tolled (MA outside of Masspike, and ON).

However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

Rest area closing doesn't save a whole lot of money - maybe $250,000 to $500,000 or so. They get a few miles of roadway paving out of that savings.  Most of the savings will be in salaries as they won't have employees attending to the needs of an open rest area, such as cleaning, trash, mowing and some maintenance costs, water and sewer.

It's enough.  NY in particular saw rest areas as money suckers.  There's good reason why you see a significant number of closed ones around the state.  Have to keep in mind that budgets are regional, not statewide in that regard.  So, any money a region could save and spend on the rest of the capital program, the better.

Quote from: plain on November 11, 2021, 09:18:40 PM
Service Plazas come in handy when it is either costly to exit and re-enter certain roads or there's few/no services in a certain area. There are Service Plazas on both Closed and Open (the entire Illinois Tollway system for example and formally the CT Tpk) toll roads, as well as on roads that were never tolled (MA outside of Masspike, and ON).

However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

The ones on toll roads now are revenue positive, they contribute money to the road, not the other way around.
All that matters at the end of the day is revenue - expenses = profit. For a captive location like that they are always going to be revenue positive to the state.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM
Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Given that service areas were banned not long after, I don't think we have enough data to truly evaluate such.  We simply don't know what the geographic distribution would have been had they not been banned.  The closest we've got is Florida's Turnpike, which has one exit and two service plazas between Fort Pierce and Kissimmee (said exit also has a truck stop).

Quote from: plain on November 11, 2021, 09:18:40 PM
However, Service Plazas obviously costs more to maintain than regular rest areas. The ones not on toll roads will have to depend on taxes (versus toll revenue) to stay afloat during periods when they're not turning a profit. There were times where states had to close regular Rest Areas because they couldn't afford the upkeep. Imagine if these were full blown Service Plazas...

Why would they cost more?  The building/bathrooms are there in both.  Heck, they probably cost less, because the group that operates the service plaza and provides the convenience store and "food concepts" (Applegreen, in the case of the rebuilt/renovated Thruway service areas once the first ones reopen) also maintains the building.  There's a separate contract for the gas station.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Montana was another extreme example of that, in the late 40's it had a very high GDP per capita because few people lived there and Anaconda Copper had mines, smelters, and wire plants that produced a large amount of wealth.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Montana was another extreme example of that, in the late 40's it had a very high GDP per capita because few people lived there and Anaconda Copper had mines, smelters, and wire plants that produced a large amount of wealth.

But wasn't your argument higher up that wealth AND population density is what led to the amount of highways in the Northeast?

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on November 12, 2021, 04:53:05 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Montana was another extreme example of that, in the late 40's it had a very high GDP per capita because few people lived there and Anaconda Copper had mines, smelters, and wire plants that produced a large amount of wealth.

But wasn't your argument higher up that wealth AND population density is what led to the amount of highways in the Northeast?

Chris

Yes, and those states at least had one of those, enough to build a few tollways. They did not have the population density, but were located where significant long haul traffic would help to make up the difference.

And all of this is really a side show, since the vast majority of such roads were in the northeast, with these being more of an exception to the rule.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

My point about closed-system toll roads being prevalent in the northeast (and northern midwest if you want to extend that territory to Illinois, Ohio, and Indiana) seems to be flying over certain heads.

Open-system toll roads have been employed in other areas. Kansas is a notable exception. Yet as I said, service plazas are more prevalent on closed-system toll roads than open-system roads. Kentucky had two plazas on the old Kentucky Turnpike, and I don't know why because it's not that far between E-town and Louisville.

It's more feasible to put service plazas on these closed-system routes because of convenience, but with the advent of electronic tolling,that becomes less of a consideration.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

NY, MA, CT, RI, NH and ME gained from 2010 to 2020.  VT stayed about the same.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

You haven't a clue what you're talking about. All of Oklahoma's bonds are sold on the open bond market. You don't have to be an Oklahoman to buy OTA bonds and they can end up being held by mutual funds or in investment portfolios like any other bond. And given that the bonds are paid back with toll revenue, Oklahoma's relative wealth or lack thereof has little bearing at all on the turnpike system (especially since the whole system is funded by I-44, which carries a large amount of pass-thru traffic).

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 08:09:52 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

You haven't a clue what you're talking about. All of Oklahoma's bonds are sold on the open bond market. You don't have to be an Oklahoman to buy OTA bonds and they can end up being held by mutual funds or in investment portfolios like any other bond. And given that the bonds are paid back with toll revenue, Oklahoma's relative wealth or lack thereof has little bearing at all on the turnpike system (especially since the whole system is funded by I-44, which carries a large amount of pass-thru traffic).

As an economist I do know exactly what I am talking about. And I know you don't have to be from Oklahoma to buy the bonds, nor was any such point made.
However, especially in that day, any bond issue from an entity in that state would be helped along greatly by some locals having money to invest in them. Markets were far less liquid, and no one is interested in putting money in a road that no one can afford the tolls for to pay for the interest on your coupons.
Second, every bond is supposed to be "paid back with x revenue", but if that were entirely true then there would be no risk in the bond market. In reality, there is risk in the bond market precisely because not all bond issues end up paying the coupons, or for that matter even the principal. Indeed, some toll roads have gone bankrupt, meaning that equity holders would have been the first to go followed by the bondholders.

Bonds are not magic. If I claim an uninhabited island in the middle of nowhere and start my own country and issue bonds to build an airport, guess what? No one will buy them. A bond issue can only be floated if investors are willing to take the risk at that price. And going into that is the revenue model of the business, which in this case is dependent on tolls that have to be collected from someone. People in NYC are not going to pay those tolls, people in Oklahoma will have to pay a large portion, along with passing traffic.

Quote from: Rothman on November 12, 2021, 08:04:14 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

NY, MA, CT, RI, NH and ME gained from 2010 to 2020.  VT stayed about the same.

Yes, but when you compare that region over the last 100 years it is obvious there has been a massive reduction of share, if not always absolute numbers.
Furthermore, in many cases those represent distributions that are not relevant from a road standpoint. Rochester NY for example has lost 20k people in the last 30 years. Albany 10k. These might be made up by people moving into NYC, but from a road standpoint distribution matters.
The general expansion of the population tends to mask these trends, but on any kind of a corrected basis the northeast has lost a considerable number of people to other parts of the US, but that is not indicative of those being poor states.

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 08:32:19 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 08:09:52 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

You haven't a clue what you're talking about. All of Oklahoma's bonds are sold on the open bond market. You don't have to be an Oklahoman to buy OTA bonds and they can end up being held by mutual funds or in investment portfolios like any other bond. And given that the bonds are paid back with toll revenue, Oklahoma's relative wealth or lack thereof has little bearing at all on the turnpike system (especially since the whole system is funded by I-44, which carries a large amount of pass-thru traffic).

As an economist I do know exactly what I am talking about. And I know you don't have to be from Oklahoma to buy the bonds, nor was any such point made.
However, especially in that day, any bond issue from an entity in that state would be helped along greatly by some locals having money to invest in them. Markets were far less liquid, and no one is interested in putting money in a road that no one can afford the tolls for to pay for the interest on your coupons.
Second, every bond is supposed to be "paid back with x revenue", but if that were entirely true then there would be no risk in the bond market. In reality, there is risk in the bond market precisely because not all bond issues end up paying the coupons, or for that matter even the principal. Indeed, some toll roads have gone bankrupt, meaning that equity holders would have been the first to go followed by the bondholders.

Bonds are not magic. If I claim an uninhabited island in the middle of nowhere and start my own country and issue bonds to build an airport, guess what? No one will buy them. A bond issue can only be floated if investors are willing to take the risk at that price. And going into that is the revenue model of the business, which in this case is dependent on tolls that have to be collected from someone. People in NYC are not going to pay those tolls, people in Oklahoma will have to pay a large portion, along with passing traffic.

I don't think anyone in 1950 seriously thought there was much risk attached to funding a US-66 bypass. The traffic was there for sure to support it. And there was already a big existing market for turnpike bonds, as Oklahoma only floated their bonds after they saw what a success the NJTP bond issue had been.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 08:51:37 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 08:32:19 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 08:09:52 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 06:53:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 05:52:11 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 04:48:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 12, 2021, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2021, 11:11:08 AM

Quote from: HighwayStar on November 11, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
No, geography has a great deal to do with it.

The fact that closed-system toll roads, with their attendant service plazas, are concentrated in the northeastern part of the country is entirely a coincidence. Those states built toll roads before the advent of the interstate system and it was simpler and easier to stick red/white/blue signs on them than to build a parallel free route or leave a gap in the numbered system.

And I forgot about the WV Turnpike being an open-system turnpike with service plazas, but the two old ones there are northbound only, and Tamarack is relatively new and it's the only one that serves both directions.

Not a coincidence, the same causal factor is at play with both. The reason those regions had roads first is not a coincidence. Those regions had the wealth and population density to justify such roads, whereas the rest of the country did not. And that wealth and population density is the same reason that service plazas thrive there.

Ah yes, pre-Interstate turnpikes were only built in bastions of great wealth and population density, like Wichita and Tulsa.

Those states were actually fairly wealthy at the time, mostly thanks to very low population density and significant reserves of petroleum. Oklahoma and Kansas were both major producers and collaborated with the Texas Railroad Commission to regulate prices. Until the discovery of the East Texas Field both went through periods where production per capita would have been significantly higher then Texas.

Despite the oil, at no point was Oklahoma a wealthy state. Rural Oklahoma was already losing population by the 1950s. The Turner Turnpike was all funded through bonds, not oil money.

KTA, meanwhile, had a first-year budget of $25,000, and its first headquarters was in a disused barbershop in Topeka. It, too, got all of its construction financing through bonds.

That's not how it works. No one said it was funded with oil money. Nor is loosing population make it a poor state, most of the northeast is loosing population too.
However, having the oil money makes bond funding more feasible. Who do you think buys the bonds?

You haven't a clue what you're talking about. All of Oklahoma's bonds are sold on the open bond market. You don't have to be an Oklahoman to buy OTA bonds and they can end up being held by mutual funds or in investment portfolios like any other bond. And given that the bonds are paid back with toll revenue, Oklahoma's relative wealth or lack thereof has little bearing at all on the turnpike system (especially since the whole system is funded by I-44, which carries a large amount of pass-thru traffic).

As an economist I do know exactly what I am talking about. And I know you don't have to be from Oklahoma to buy the bonds, nor was any such point made.
However, especially in that day, any bond issue from an entity in that state would be helped along greatly by some locals having money to invest in them. Markets were far less liquid, and no one is interested in putting money in a road that no one can afford the tolls for to pay for the interest on your coupons.
Second, every bond is supposed to be "paid back with x revenue", but if that were entirely true then there would be no risk in the bond market. In reality, there is risk in the bond market precisely because not all bond issues end up paying the coupons, or for that matter even the principal. Indeed, some toll roads have gone bankrupt, meaning that equity holders would have been the first to go followed by the bondholders.

Bonds are not magic. If I claim an uninhabited island in the middle of nowhere and start my own country and issue bonds to build an airport, guess what? No one will buy them. A bond issue can only be floated if investors are willing to take the risk at that price. And going into that is the revenue model of the business, which in this case is dependent on tolls that have to be collected from someone. People in NYC are not going to pay those tolls, people in Oklahoma will have to pay a large portion, along with passing traffic.

I don't think anyone in 1950 seriously thought there was much risk attached to funding a US-66 bypass. The traffic was there for sure to support it. And there was already a big existing market for turnpike bonds, as Oklahoma only floated their bonds after they saw what a success the NJTP bond issue had been.

All investments carry risk. Apparent demand is not enough for a successful business. If it were, there would not be so many bankrupt companies around us.