Cutting corners in maintenance

[Beltway]

Given that the rest areas were built with 90% FHWA funding, and in most cases current improvments receive 80% FHWA funding, the federal standard that has existed since 1956 should stand, IMHO.  The Safety Rest Areas (official name) are on public right-of-way and are for brief REST, not for major retail businesses, which can be accessed in private sector businesses on private land, by the more frequent interchange spacing that toll-free Interstates have (compared to turnpikes).

So?  Your point is?  Just because the state got dollars from BPR and FHWA means little.  Elected officials at the federal level make those rules, and can change them, and IMO in this instance they should. 

No, it is like deciding whether to delegate full tolling decisions over to the states on the toll-free Interstate highways that were built with 90% federal funding.

I think that decision should be under federal control, and that it needs much debate before any change.  ISRRPP under MAP-21 still has only 3 pilot projects for tolling rural toll-free Interstate highways.

The original toll-free Interstate highways have interchange spacing averaging about 4 miles in rural areas, and nearly every corridor has frequent service stations and restaurants already existing and easily accessible (unlike having to leave a toll-ticketed turnpike with very long rural interchange spacing like with IN, OH, PA, NJ, NY).

Wonder how sewage from the massive Sideling Hill service plaza on I-76 (Pennsylvania Turnpike) is treated?  It's certainly "in the middle of nowhere."

I can see that it has a sewage treatment plant on the north across the street from the plaza.

One example doesn't really prove anything, as that plant may have been built over 40 years ago (that plaza was there when I first drove by, and that was 1972) and may have been grandfathered in as far as environmental standards, and it may or may not be able to handle peak loads, and overflows may indeed wind up in a creek (not a joke, happens more often than some might think).

It is a FAct that it is difficult to find sites for truck stops along rural Interstate highways, due to local opposition, and due to sewage disposal issues.  Proposing new turnpike-type service plazas would have the same issues.

[Scott5114]

That "average interchange spacing" figure is going to be a lot higher in Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, etc...

[cpzilliacus]

Given that the rest areas were built with 90% FHWA funding, and in most cases current improvments receive 80% FHWA funding, the federal standard that has existed since 1956 should stand, IMHO.  The Safety Rest Areas (official name) are on public right-of-way and are for brief REST, not for major retail businesses, which can be accessed in private sector businesses on private land, by the more frequent interchange spacing that toll-free Interstates have (compared to turnpikes).

So?  Your point is?  Just because the state got dollars from BPR and FHWA means little.  Elected officials at the federal level make those rules, and can change them, and IMO in this instance they should. 

No, it is like deciding whether to delegate full tolling decisions over to the states on the toll-free Interstate highways that were built with 90% federal funding.

I think that decision should be under federal control, and that it needs much debate before any change.  ISRRPP under MAP-21 still has only 3 pilot projects for tolling rural toll-free Interstate highways.

The original toll-free Interstate highways have interchange spacing averaging about 4 miles in rural areas, and nearly every corridor has frequent service stations and restaurants already existing and easily accessible (unlike having to leave a toll-ticketed turnpike with very long rural interchange spacing like with IN, OH, PA, NJ, NY).

Congress and the President, as long as they operate within the bounds of the Constitution, can make whatever changes they wish to federal statutes. 

That "free" Interstates have relatively closely-spaced interchanges is (to me) irrelevant. 

This is about allowing the private sector to assume the costs of maintaining rest areas (if states wish to do that).  The Delaware Turnpike/JFK Highway segments of I-95 have interchanges that are relatively close together (with plenty of services available off of the toll road), yet these are some of the busiest toll road service plazas in the United States. 

Wonder how sewage from the massive Sideling Hill service plaza on I-76 (Pennsylvania Turnpike) is treated?  It's certainly "in the middle of nowhere."

I can see that it has a sewage treatment plant on the north across the street from the plaza.

And those cannot be built elsewhere?

One example doesn't really prove anything, as that plant may have been built over 40 years ago (that plaza was there when I first drove by, and that was 1972) and may have been grandfathered in as far as environmental standards, and it may or may not be able to handle peak loads, and overflows may indeed wind up in a creek (not a joke, happens more often than some might think).

I think that untreated sewage from any highway facility, be it a rest area or a service plaza, would quickly come to the attention of state and federal environmental regulators.

It is a FAct that it is difficult to find sites for truck stops along rural Interstate highways, due to local opposition, and due to sewage disposal issues.  Proposing new turnpike-type service plazas would have the same issues.

There are plenty of truck stops along I-95 and I-70 and I-81, once one gets away from NIMBY-prone metropolitan areas.  That may be why there are so many truck-oriented businesses clustered around I-95 (Virginia) Exit 104 near Carmel Church/Ruther Glen in Caroline County (and there's not much else there, I presume that the county provided those parcels with water and sewer somehow).

[vdeane]

No, it is like deciding whether to delegate full tolling decisions over to the states on the toll-free Interstate highways that were built with 90% federal funding.

I think that decision should be under federal control, and that it needs much debate before any change.  ISRRPP under MAP-21 still has only 3 pilot projects for tolling rural toll-free Interstate highways.

The original toll-free Interstate highways have interchange spacing averaging about 4 miles in rural areas, and nearly every corridor has frequent service stations and restaurants already existing and easily accessible (unlike having to leave a toll-ticketed turnpike with very long rural interchange spacing like with IN, OH, PA, NJ, NY).

We're not talking about turing interstates into toll roads so they can get service plazas.  We're talking about changing rest areas to service plazas on FREE interstates and having the interstates remain FREE.  You know, like the service plazas on ON 401.

[cpzilliacus]

No, it is like deciding whether to delegate full tolling decisions over to the states on the toll-free Interstate highways that were built with 90% federal funding.

I think that decision should be under federal control, and that it needs much debate before any change.  ISRRPP under MAP-21 still has only 3 pilot projects for tolling rural toll-free Interstate highways.

The original toll-free Interstate highways have interchange spacing averaging about 4 miles in rural areas, and nearly every corridor has frequent service stations and restaurants already existing and easily accessible (unlike having to leave a toll-ticketed turnpike with very long rural interchange spacing like with IN, OH, PA, NJ, NY).

We're not talking about turing interstates into toll roads so they can get service plazas.  We're talking about changing rest areas to service plazas on FREE interstates and having the interstates remain FREE.  You know, like the service plazas on ON 401.

deanej, you hit the nail on the head.

Ontario has quite a few Freeway Service Centres on its 400-series network.    Below is an image of a Statoil gas station and C-store on [free] motorway E4/E20 south of Stockholm, Sweden. 

[Beltway]

The original toll-free Interstate highways have interchange spacing averaging about 4 miles in rural areas, and nearly every corridor has frequent service stations and restaurants already existing and easily accessible (unlike having to leave a toll-ticketed turnpike with very long rural interchange spacing like with IN, OH, PA, NJ, NY).

Congress and the President, as long as they operate within the bounds of the Constitution, can make whatever changes they wish to federal statutes. 

Can, but in this case shouldn't, IMO.

That "free" Interstates have relatively closely-spaced interchanges is (to me) irrelevant. 

Very relevant, as it allows frequent service and food near the highway.

This is about allowing the private sector to assume the costs of maintaining rest areas (if states wish to do that).

No, you are proposing far more than that, allowing them to build private businesses on tax-funded Interstate right-of-way.

I think that untreated sewage from any highway facility, be it a rest area or a service plaza, would quickly come to the attention of state and federal environmental regulators.

Yet Baltimore's city sewer system regularly has that problem after heavy rains, overflowing untreated sewage into the harbor.  Lot's of other cities do as well.

There are plenty of truck stops along I-95 and I-70 and I-81, once one gets away from NIMBY-prone metropolitan areas.  That

Try polling those food and service station businesses, to see if they want a select few to build on tax-funded Interstate highway right-of-way.  Very few would want that brand of "competition".

ISRRPP's 3 pilots will allow commercial rest areas to be built, along with the tolling of the highway for capacity increases.  That is appropriate, IMO.  Doing it on toll-free Interstate highways is not.

[vdeane]

Very relevant, as it allows frequent service and food near the highway.

Who wants to get off?  When I'm traveling on the interstate, I prefer to minimize the number of times I get off; call it OCD, because I really don't have a much better reason.  Getting off for services can be a hassle though, depending on how well they're signed on the ramp and the configuration of the interchange.  Whenever I get services in unfamiliar areas I make sure to plan everything out before I leave to avoid such situations (plus I can be picky, at least with food).

No, you are proposing far more than that, allowing them to build private businesses on tax-funded Interstate right-of-way.

The way it works in the northeast is, the state builds the plaza and facilities then leases the space to the highest bidder.  It's nothing more than allowing the state to not operate rest areas at a loss while providing additional services to travelers.

Try polling those food and service station businesses, to see if they want a select few to build on tax-funded Interstate highway right-of-way.  Very few would want that brand of "competition".

Since when are businesses given priority over individuals? (note: don't answer, I don't want this thread to turn into a corporate personhood debate) Businesses are supposed to adapt to changing conditions - in fact, that is one of the hallmarks of free market capitalism.  Passing laws to protect the status quo so some businesses can have a better bottom line is the opposite.  I'm not sure if businesses would really suffer though.  While fast food places on interchanges would likely see less business, people who currently go to non-fast food places wouldn't suddenly change their habits because of service plazas, and service plaza gas is well known for being expensive,.

ISRRPP's 3 pilots will allow commercial rest areas to be built, along with the tolling of the highway for capacity increases.  That is appropriate, IMO.  Doing it on toll-free Interstate highways is not.

I don't see the need to make the distinction between toll roads and free roads, especially since they're becoming more alike every decade.  Soon, the ONLY difference will be how much you pay on newer toll roads thanks to ORT and pushes to go all-electronic.

[Beltway]

No, you are proposing far more than that, allowing them to build private businesses on tax-funded Interstate right-of-way.

The way it works in the northeast is, the state builds the plaza and facilities then leases the space to the highest bidder.  It's nothing more than allowing the state to not operate rest areas at a loss while providing additional services to travelers.

Again, those service plazas were built over 40 years ago, mainly on toll-ticketed turnpikes with very long rural interchange spacing.

That is not relevant to current proposals to build such new facilities on toll-free Interstate highways.

The rest areas are part of what we pay road use taxes and license fees to support.

When Congress created the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s, community leaders feared that local businesses, jobs and tax bases would shrink as truck drivers and motorists bypassed their cities and towns. As a result, Congress prohibited states from offering commercial services, such as food and fuel, at commercial rest areas on the toll-free Interstate highway right-of-way built after Jan. 1, 1960. Since then, businesses such as restaurants, fuel stations and truckstops have clustered near the interstates at the interchanges along the IHS to provide services to interstate travelers.

Here is what an industry advocate says --

http://www.nacsonline.com/NACS/Government/Other/Pages/RestAreaCommercialization.aspx

Quote --

Rest Area Commercialization
Posted: September 12, 2012                             

Intro to the Issue

In an effort to raise revenues, a handful of states have suggested that the federal government overturn a law that prohibits commercial development at highway rest areas. Repealing the law would allow state governments to get into the business of selling food and fuel from an advantageous location on the highway shoulder, or receive contract payments from commercial interests to do the same.

While at first glance rest area commercialization seems like an easy way for states to generate revenue, the fact is this will jeopardize private businesses that for the last 50-plus years have operated under the current law and established locations at the highway exits. Due to their advantageous locations, state-owned commercial rest areas establish virtual monopolies on the sale of services to highway travelers.

Virginia Tech researchers predict that commercializing rest areas nationwide would mean a loss of more than $55 billion in annual sales for existing businesses at highway exits – translating to a 46% decrease in Interstate-serving gas station sales, a 44% decrease in sales at Interstate-serving restaurants, and a 35% decrease in truck service sales at Interstate-serving truck service businesses.

Why You Should Care

Businesses located off the highway cannot compete with commercialized rest areas. These rest areas are opportunely located on the highway right-of-way and would create a de facto monopoly in favor of businesses operated out of rest areas.

What NACS Is Doing

NACS believes it is imperative that Congress maintains the current prohibition on rest area commercialization. Congress must reject any attempt to weaken existing law during the next surface transportation bill, or any other legislation. NACS is part of a broad coalition of organizations that oppose rest area commercialization. Rest area commercialization will not increase the number of hamburgers or gasoline gallons sold, but simply transfer the point of sale away from the current competitive environment at highway exits to the sole business contractor that pays the largest amount to rent the location on the shoulder of the highway.

Latest Developments

NACS and other coalition organizations have been working with lawmakers in the House and Senate involved with drafting the new surface transportation law to educate them regarding the implications of commercialization of rest areas.

The House and Senate were not able to negotiate a 5-year extension of the surface transportation bill. On July 6th, President Obama signed a two-year transportation funding bill. This bill did not include any language authorizing states to commercialize rest areas.

Negotiations on a long-term highway bill will continue through the next Congress and NACS will remain vigilant against new commercialization proposals.

[end quote]

[Scott5114]

Businesses located off the highway cannot compete with commercialized rest areas. These rest areas are opportunely located on the highway right-of-way and would create a de facto monopoly in favor of businesses operated out of rest areas.

Utterly false. On-highway businesses have an advantage, of course, but there are several good reasons to pass up on-highway services in favor of off-highway services–on-highway fuel prices are usually higher due to a "captive audience" effect, you may not like the brand(s) of food offered, or the service area has bad service/is slow/is dirty. The existence of the on-highway McDonalds in Vinita, OK doesn't mean I stop there every time–in fact, due to bad experiences with it, I make it a point to stop at Tulsa or Joplin for food. Sounds like competition is working fine to me.

Another thing is that we cannot really take into account toll roads as a representative scenario. People are often reluctant to exit a toll road because then you often have to go through the added hassle of stopping and paying and having to get a new ticket as you get back on. That barrier doesn't exist on a free road.

[Beltway]

Businesses located off the highway cannot compete with commercialized rest areas. These rest areas are opportunely located on the highway right-of-way and would create a de facto monopoly in favor of businesses operated out of rest areas.

Utterly false.

Your opinion.  Do an internet search, and you will see that there are plenty of industry sources and studies that agree with the one I posted.  There is massive opposition to the commercialization of toll-free Interstate highway rest areas.

[vdeane]

Again, those service plazas were built over 40 years ago, mainly on toll-ticketed turnpikes with very long rural interchange spacing.

I'd hardly consider the New Jersey Turnpike or the Connecticut Turnpike to have very long rural interchange spacing.   In fact, if someone said that about the Connecticut Turnpike, I would look at them like they had three heads.

Your opinion.  Do an internet search, and you will see that there are plenty of industry sources and studies that agree with the one I posted.  There is massive opposition to the commercialization of toll-free Interstate highway rest areas.

I'd hardly consider industry sources unbiased.  Plus the reasons for not allowing service areas was to protect small business, not chain fast food joints.  In fact, by encouraging sprawl at interchanges, not allowing service areas probably did more to harm the small businesses than to help them.

[J N Winkler]

The last time we had a pointed discussion on this issue--a year ago, I think--I suggested that there might prove to be considerably less interest from developers in building for-profit businesses at rest areas than is anticipated by the state DOTs that have been aggressively promoting rest-area commercialization, because of the considerable costs of reconstructing and expanding an already-developed and, in many cases, quite constrained site.  If a policy of commercializing rest areas is established anyway, this could lead to a situation where state DOTs sign financially unfavorable site redevelopment agreements with retail operators just to get a commercialization program off the ground.  Put simply, what the state DOTs think is a cash bonanza could very well turn out to be a money pit.  Why is so little thought given to this particular downside?

[Beltway]

Again, those service plazas were built over 40 years ago, mainly on toll-ticketed turnpikes with very long rural interchange spacing.

I'd hardly consider the New Jersey Turnpike or the Connecticut Turnpike to have very long rural interchange spacing.   In fact, if someone said that about the Connecticut Turnpike, I would look at them like they had three heads.

The rural southern half of the NJTP does have very long interchange spacing.  CT and NJ are short in mileage compared to the vast rural lenghts of the turnpikes I was referring to, NY, PA, OH and IN.

Your opinion.  Do an internet search, and you will see that there are plenty of industry sources and studies that agree with the one I posted.  There is massive opposition to the commercialization of toll-free Interstate highway rest areas.

I'd hardly consider industry sources unbiased.  Plus the reasons for not allowing service areas was to protect small business, not chain fast food joints.  In fact, by encouraging sprawl at interchanges, not allowing service areas probably did more to harm the small businesses than to help them.

You're stating you ad hoc opinions and feelings again.  Of course industry sources are not unbiased.  The fact that I see, is that that those sources have done lots of research, that they claim that there would be a massive negative effect to the about 97,000 small businesses that have built near the interchanges, and benefits to a small number of large corporations.

Another source --
"According to the group, and a coalition called the Partnership to Save Highway Communities, about 110 businesses are along the Ohio Turnpike, which has commercialized rest stops. More than 1,000 businesses, though, are along the state's Interstate 75, where rest stops are not commercialized."

[vdeane]

And how many of those 1,000 businesses are generic chains?  The fact is, people who want to eat fast food will eat fast food, and the people who want a diner will go to the diner.  The diner won't be setting up shop at a service plaza... the era where they would has been gone for over 60 years now.  And while I may feel sympathy for a mom and pop diner, I feel NO sympathy for the chains.

[sp_redelectric]

Just wondered how other states are cutting corners to save on expenses when it comes to highway maintenance.

Oregon moans and complains about not having money, but ODOT was able to scrape up $40 million bucks to buy two brand new passenger trains to hand over to Washington State (literally - ODOT will "own" the trains, but they will spend most of their time north of Portland, including being maintained in Seattle) to support a Portland-Eugene rail service that barely manages 85 riders per train per day (out of nearly 300 seats onboard).

Oregon also makes sure to replace signs on a very regular basis.

If there's one thing Oregon cuts back on, it in recent years has used cheaper asphalt and does more cheaper overlays than actual reconstruction jobs.  Although they are getting better about scraping off the old wear layer of asphalt.  And some major projects (Interstate Bridge replacement, Newberg-Dundee Bypass) have been politically hijacked so a lot of money saved up has gone elsewhere.

[cpzilliacus]

No, you are proposing far more than that, allowing them to build private businesses on tax-funded Interstate right-of-way.

The way it works in the northeast is, the state builds the plaza and facilities then leases the space to the highest bidder.  It's nothing more than allowing the state to not operate rest areas at a loss while providing additional services to travelers.

Again, those service plazas were built over 40 years ago, mainly on toll-ticketed turnpikes with very long rural interchange spacing.

Ever heard of the Delaware Turnpike?  JFK Highway?  Garden State Parkway?  Connecticut Turnpike?  Illinois Tollway (an entire system of non-ticket toll roads)? Oklahoma Turnpike (ditto)?

That is not relevant to current proposals to build such new facilities on toll-free Interstate highways.

The rest areas are part of what we pay road use taxes and license fees to support.

We're not paying enough, regardless of what a certain political party wants you to think.

When Congress created the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s, community leaders feared that local businesses, jobs and tax bases would shrink as truck drivers and motorists bypassed their cities and towns. As a result, Congress prohibited states from offering commercial services, such as food and fuel, at commercial rest areas on the toll-free Interstate highway right-of-way built after Jan. 1, 1960. Since then, businesses such as restaurants, fuel stations and truckstops have clustered near the interstates at the interchanges along the IHS to provide services to interstate travelers.

Now you know very well that the Interstates bypassed many cities and towns and individual businesses, and more than a few of those businesses died as a result.  Take a ride on I-95 between Emporia, Va. and Petersburg, Va. sometime and look at the many (dead) businesses along U.S. 301 that runs hard by the freeway on its west side.

Here is what an industry advocate says --

Let's call that group what it really is - a lobbying operation, no different from the Sierra Club, APTA or any of the rest of them.

[cpzilliacus]

And how many of those 1,000 businesses are generic chains?  The fact is, people who want to eat fast food will eat fast food, and the people who want a diner will go to the diner.  The diner won't be setting up shop at a service plaza... the era where they would has been gone for over 60 years now.  And while I may feel sympathy for a mom and pop diner, I feel NO sympathy for the chains.

Agreed. 

And I think at least some of the diners and similar businesses that had a "following" probably were survive the construction of the "free" Interstates just fine.

[Beltway]

Again, those service plazas were built over 40 years ago, mainly on toll-ticketed turnpikes with very long rural interchange spacing.

Ever heard of the Delaware Turnpike?  JFK Highway?  Garden State Parkway?  Connecticut Turnpike?  Illinois Tollway (an entire system of non-ticket toll roads)? Oklahoma Turnpike (ditto)?

What about them?  They were grandfathered in as tollroads not built as 90% federally-funded Interstate highways. 

Not relevant to the topic of commercializing rest areas today on toll-free Interstate highways.

Here is what an industry advocate says --

Let's call that group what it really is - a lobbying operation, no different from the Sierra Club, APTA or any of the rest of them.

Your handwaving is completely missing my point.  Argue about bias or lack of bias as much as you want ... that is not my point.

The cogent point is that a number of national small business associations are strongly opposed to commercializing rest areas today on toll-free Interstate highways.  They believe that they have research that shows that it would be hugely detrimental to the tens of thousands of businesses that were established under the rules set out in 1960, and that a small number of large corportations would benefit.

This level of national opposition makes it highly unlikely that Congress will change the rules.

[Beltway]

And how many of those 1,000 businesses are generic chains?  The fact is, people who want to eat fast food will eat fast food, and the people who want a diner will go to the diner.  The diner won't be setting up shop at a service plaza... the era where they would has been gone for over 60 years now.  And while I may feel sympathy for a mom and pop diner, I feel NO sympathy for the chains.

You seemed to have missed the point that OH I-75 has 10 times the number of nearby businesses as compared to the ones near the similar length Ohio Turnpike.

[NE2]

You seemed to have missed the point that OH I-75 has 10 times the number of nearby businesses as compared to the ones near the similar length Ohio Turnpike.

There are many reasons for this. Certainly service areas will play a part, but so do other facts:
*I-75 was built next to or directly over old US 25, while the Ohio Turnpike follows new terrain, straying far from surface roads
*I-75 has many more interchanges
*I-75 is not a toll road

Except for the last point, you'd do much better to compare the Ohio Turnpike to I-71 in Ohio.

[Beltway]

You seemed to have missed the point that OH I-75 has 10 times the number of nearby businesses as compared to the ones near the similar length Ohio Turnpike.

There are many reasons for this. Certainly service areas will play a part, but so do other facts:
*I-75 was built next to or directly over old US 25, while the Ohio Turnpike follows new terrain, straying far from surface roads
*I-75 has many more interchanges
*I-75 is not a toll road

Except for the last point, you'd do much better to compare the Ohio Turnpike to I-71 in Ohio.

Another study --

I-95 in Maryland

2 commercial rest areas within 20 miles of each other (MMs83& MM 98)

Over 109 miles, I-95 Maryland has only 201 interstate-based businesses
- 39 Gas Stations
- 6 Fuel Stops
- 6 Truckstops (providing 1,255 truck parking spaces)
- 3 Truck Service Facilities
- 41 Hotel/Motels
- 106 Restaurants
.........

I-95 in Virginia

No Commercial Rest Areas...

Over 178 Miles of I-95
858 Interstate businesses including:
- 129 Gas Stations
- 19 Fuel Stops
- 11 Truckstops
- 12 Truck Service facilities
- 516 Restaurants
- 171 hotels/motels

[Scott5114]

I somehow doubt that Maryland House and Chesapeake House are responsible for the loss of 320 businesses each.

A significant percentage of I-95 in MD has to pass through the Washington and Baltimore metropolitan areas. These businesses are going to have to compete with more non-"Interstate-based" businesses. If I am hungry in a rural area and my only options are McDonalds or keep going, I might stop at McDonalds even if it's not my first choice because it's what's there. But in a city, I might have the option to pass up the McDonald's at the interchange and drive a couple miles into the city and eat elsewhere.

Where are you getting these statistics, anyhow? What is the criteria used for "interstate-based business"?

[vdeane]

While you're at it, why don't you look at two highways that are more similar to each other, such as I-87 and I-95 in Westchester county?  They're both of similar length, similar number of exits, both toll roads operated by NYSTA; the big differences between them is the additional tolling on I-87 (New Rochelle is nothbound only, while Yonkers is both directions and Tappan Zee is southbound after the bridge with the same name) and the Ardsley Travel Plaza.  By your logic, I-87 should be a barren wasteland with no businesses on it ruined by the commies at NYSTA who built the travel plaza.

Why should tolls be a differentiating factor?  You persist in claiming that toll roads have "very long" interchange spacing compared to free roads, which we've proven again and again is false (while some do, most don't).  You fail to differentiate between small businesses and multi-national chains that use the interstates the same way a parasite uses your internal organs.

[Scott5114]

In fact, as stated above, I'd expect ticket-system toll roads to have fewer businesses on them regardless of whether they have service plazas, simply because the added inconvenience of paying the toll upon exiting (and perhaps the possibility of having to pay more for doing so if the toll structure is calculated in such a way) is often enough of a deterrent to exiting.

[Beltway]

While you're at it, why don't you look at two highways that are more similar to each other, such as I-87 and I-95 in Westchester county?  They're both of similar length, similar number of exits, both toll roads operated by NYSTA; the big differences between them is the additional tolling on I-87 (New Rochelle is nothbound only, while Yonkers is both directions and Tappan Zee is southbound after the bridge with the same name) and the Ardsley Travel Plaza.  By your logic, I-87 should be a barren wasteland with no businesses on it ruined by the commies at NYSTA who built the travel plaza.

Because Westchester County NY is a heavily populated suburban county of greater New York City.

Why should tolls be a differentiating factor?  You persist in claiming that toll roads have "very long" interchange spacing compared to free roads, which we've proven again and again is false (while some do, most don't).

You continually misread what I said, I used the qualifier words MAINLY and RURAL. 

'Rural' does not include Westchester Co. NY. 

'Mainly', as in the bulk of the rural lengths (specifically mentioned IN, OH, PA, NJ and NY, the lion's mileage share of the turnpikes built before 1960), which is indeed true.

You fail to differentiate between small businesses and multi-national chains that use the interstates the same way a parasite uses your internal organs.

Many of the chains are operated on a franchise basis, in that the stores operate according to chain standards, while the individual stores are owned and managed by the proprietor of that store. So many of those chain stores are in effect individually small businesses.