Toll Roads Are Bad

[kernals12]

I'm going to add my opinion to the toll road debate. To understand why they're bad we need to remember why we built freeways in the first place. It wasn't just to offer faster travel for motorists, but also to alleviate the through traffic that was bringing noise, congestion, and accidents to many communities. By tolling highways, we encourage people to use surface streets that are more dangerous, more easily congested, and are more of a community nuisance.

[hotdogPi]

Let's say that the maximum flow on I-90 is achieved at 2200 vehicles per hour per lane. (This number is mostly independent of which freeway it is, so it's a reasonable assumption.)

If 4400 vehicles per hour want to use it, it will be significantly congested, and the flow will be much lower.
Assuming triangular model where optimal density = 1/5 of jam density and free-flow speed is 75 mph:
At optimal flow, density is 2200 vehicles per hour / 75 mph = 29 vehicles per mile per lane
Jam density = 29*5 = 147 vehicles (looks slightly off due to rounding)
wave speed = 2200/(147-29) = -18.7 mph
Demand of 4400 vehicles per hour: Density increases to 4400/2200 * 29 = 59 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by ¼ (it's linear from the optimal point to the jammed point, and density went from ⅕ to ⅖) to 1650 vehicles per hour
Speed = 1650/59 = 28 mph. By doubling the number of cars on the road, your speed is now less than half what it was. (This makes sense; doubling the number of cars at the same flow will halve the average speed, so if the flow decreases, speed will decrease, too.)

This is alleviated slightly by Waze users seeing it's congested.

Here are the numbers if demand is 3000 and optimal is 2200:
Density = 3000/2200 * 29 = 39.5 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by 800/(2200*4) * 2200 = 200 → flow = 2000 vehicles per hour
Speed = 2000/39.5 = 50.6 mph. Still a significant difference compared to 75 mph free flow.

If tolling reduces demand to 2200 or 2000 vehicles per hour, it will flow much better.

Image for reference (a triangle is very close and much easier to calculate):

Attribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flow_Density_Relationship.png

[Rothman]

Toll roads aren't inherently bad.  The way they are implemented could be, though.

With our current mix of taxes and tolls, I find tolls a means to divide the economic classes -- only those who can afford to can travel on the roads rather than all those that need to.

But, if we tolled everything and got rid of taxes, I think the inequality could be lessened.

Better yet:  Fund everything through a VMT tax and get rid of tolls.

[NWI_Irish96]

In most cases, Toll Roads are a means for states to raise revenue from residents of other states. Income taxes, sales taxes and vehicle registration fees come almost entirely from in state. Tolls, as well as lodging taxes, come largely from out of state.

[renegade]

Aaaaand, out come the charts ... 

[Max Rockatansky]

Is it just me or does it seem like every other forum user starts out with the same generic opinions that are all over the road world as of late?

[sprjus4]

Let's say that the maximum flow on I-90 is achieved at 2200 vehicles per hour per lane. (This number is mostly independent of which freeway it is, so it's a reasonable assumption.)

If 4400 vehicles per hour want to use it, it will be significantly congested, and the flow will be much lower.
Assuming triangular model where optimal density = 1/5 of jam density and free-flow speed is 75 mph:
At optimal flow, density is 2200 vehicles per hour / 75 mph = 29 vehicles per mile per lane
Jam density = 29*5 = 147 vehicles (looks slightly off due to rounding)
wave speed = 2200/(147-29) = -18.7 mph
Demand of 4400 vehicles per hour: Density increases to 4400/2200 * 29 = 59 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by ¼ (it's linear from the optimal point to the jammed point, and density went from ⅕ to ⅖) to 1650 vehicles per hour
Speed = 1650/59 = 28 mph. By doubling the number of cars on the road, your speed is now less than half what it was. (This makes sense; doubling the number of cars at the same flow will halve the average speed, so if the flow decreases, speed will decrease, too.)

This is alleviated slightly by Waze users seeing it's congested.

Here are the numbers if demand is 3000 and optimal is 2200:
Density = 3000/2200 * 29 = 39.5 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by 800/(2200*4) * 2200 = 200 → flow = 2000 vehicles per hour
Speed = 2000/39.5 = 50.6 mph. Still a significant difference compared to 75 mph free flow.

If tolling reduces demand to 2200 or 2000 vehicles per hour, it will flow much better.

Image for reference (a triangle is very close and much easier to calculate):

Question. If traffic on the freeway is reduced enough due to high tolls that traffic becomes free-flowing, where does that traffic that's no longer on the freeway go? Are they on a parallel surface route choking it to death meanwhile those paying high tolls can speed by at 55+ mph?

It helps to look at it as the system effect, that includes both the toll road and the parallel free route, as opposed to solely the toll road. What strategies can be used to create as much free flow on both routes?

[ilpt4u]

It helps to look at it as the system effect, that includes both the toll road and the parallel free route, as opposed to solely the toll road. What strategies can be used to create as much free flow on both routes?

Transit rides

Changing time of travel away from peak

Carpools

Eliminate the trips completely by changing living area vs work and commerce area patterns

Just a couple of ideas that can help create more free flow

[hotdogPi]

Let's say that the maximum flow on I-90 is achieved at 2200 vehicles per hour per lane. (This number is mostly independent of which freeway it is, so it's a reasonable assumption.)

If 4400 vehicles per hour want to use it, it will be significantly congested, and the flow will be much lower.
Assuming triangular model where optimal density = 1/5 of jam density and free-flow speed is 75 mph:
At optimal flow, density is 2200 vehicles per hour / 75 mph = 29 vehicles per mile per lane
Jam density = 29*5 = 147 vehicles (looks slightly off due to rounding)
wave speed = 2200/(147-29) = -18.7 mph
Demand of 4400 vehicles per hour: Density increases to 4400/2200 * 29 = 59 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by ¼ (it's linear from the optimal point to the jammed point, and density went from ⅕ to ⅖) to 1650 vehicles per hour
Speed = 1650/59 = 28 mph. By doubling the number of cars on the road, your speed is now less than half what it was. (This makes sense; doubling the number of cars at the same flow will halve the average speed, so if the flow decreases, speed will decrease, too.)

This is alleviated slightly by Waze users seeing it's congested.

Here are the numbers if demand is 3000 and optimal is 2200:
Density = 3000/2200 * 29 = 39.5 vehicles per mile
Flow decreases by 800/(2200*4) * 2200 = 200 → flow = 2000 vehicles per hour
Speed = 2000/39.5 = 50.6 mph. Still a significant difference compared to 75 mph free flow.

If tolling reduces demand to 2200 or 2000 vehicles per hour, it will flow much better.

Image for reference (a triangle is very close and much easier to calculate):

Question. If traffic on the freeway is reduced enough due to high tolls that traffic becomes free-flowing, where does that traffic that's no longer on the freeway go? Are they on a parallel surface route choking it to death meanwhile those paying high tolls can speed by at 55+ mph?

It helps to look at it as the system effect, that includes both the toll road and the parallel free route, as opposed to solely the toll road. What strategies can be used to create as much free flow on both routes?

This is a legitimate issue, and I believe that Massachusetts needs a better arterial system. However, congestion on surface roads is not as bad for two reasons:

1. On many arterials, traffic signals dictate how fast you can go unless things get really backed up.
2. There are more alternate routes on surface roads.

[ctkatz]

I would tolerate toll roads a lot more if

a) they didn't retain pre interstate designs like a narrow RoW that forces a concrete barrier between both directions (penna tpk, kansas tpk, ok turnpike system)
b) all toll systems used the same transponder or had interoperable transponder systems
c) weren't so goddamned expensive to use per mile (penna tpk)

i understand the concept of toll roads, and yes in some areas of the country they are probably necessary to be permanent if only due to help pay for regular maintenance. but I question the private ownership of a piece of controlled limited access highway designated as a federal interstate. if there is to be a cost for using an interstate, make it a nominal fee that goes for upkeep and improvements. if it weren't for the fact that I had an ezpass, I would never have driven the pennsylvania turnpike. I did it this once in because driving all the mainland 2di is a bucket list item plus I wanted to experience the tunnels. if I'm ever in that part of country's again I'll take I 80 simply because it won't cost me almost $50 to use it.

[1995hoo]

....

Better yet:  Fund everything through a VMT tax and get rid of tolls.

I've always disliked this idea because I assume it would mean some sort of location tracking in order to compensate each jurisdiction for the distance you drove in that state during a given period. That is, consider a college student who attends school out of state but keeps his car registered in his home state, or consider someone who travels out of state for vacation (say, the stereotypical drive down I-95 to Disney World) or to visit relatives. That person is putting wear and tear on other states' roads in the course of travel, and if the miles driven tax is intended to account for that, then presumably there has to be some way to track where the vehicle was driven.

But that opens the door to all sorts of other sinister problems. About four years ago a former colleague of mine was all for the idea until I looked at him and said, "OK, how will you feel when one night the police show up at your door and say, 'Mr. [Smith], there has been a wave of crime in a wealthy part of Potomac. Records showing cars driven in the area show you were in that neighborhood. You're black and that's a white neighborhood. Explain why you were there." He is indeed black, and when I posed this scenario he suddenly froze and his eyes went wide and he said, "Maybe it's NOT such a good idea." I tend to assume that regardless of what "safeguards" the law imposes on the data, it would be misused for other purposes or the law would quickly be amended to allow for other uses.

[hotdogPi]

....

Better yet:  Fund everything through a VMT tax and get rid of tolls.

I've always disliked this idea because I assume it would mean some sort of location tracking in order to compensate each jurisdiction for the distance you drove in that state during a given period. That is, consider a college student who attends school out of state but keeps his car registered in his home state, or consider someone who travels out of state for vacation (say, the stereotypical drive down I-95 to Disney World) or to visit relatives. That person is putting wear and tear on other states' roads in the course of travel, and if the miles driven tax is intended to account for that, then presumably there has to be some way to track where the vehicle was driven.

But that opens the door to all sorts of other sinister problems. About four years ago a former colleague of mine was all for the idea until I looked at him and said, "OK, how will you feel when one night the police show up at your door and say, 'Mr. [Smith], there has been a wave of crime in a wealthy part of Potomac. Records showing cars driven in the area show you were in that neighborhood. You're black and that's a white neighborhood. Explain why you were there." He is indeed black, and when I posed this scenario he suddenly froze and his eyes went wide and he said, "Maybe it's NOT such a good idea." I tend to assume that regardless of what "safeguards" the law imposes on the data, it would be misused for other purposes or the law would quickly be amended to allow for other uses.

What if the all the money goes to the state your license plate says? Then you would just need to check the odometer.

[1995hoo]

....

Better yet:  Fund everything through a VMT tax and get rid of tolls.

I've always disliked this idea because I assume it would mean some sort of location tracking in order to compensate each jurisdiction for the distance you drove in that state during a given period. That is, consider a college student who attends school out of state but keeps his car registered in his home state, or consider someone who travels out of state for vacation (say, the stereotypical drive down I-95 to Disney World) or to visit relatives. That person is putting wear and tear on other states' roads in the course of travel, and if the miles driven tax is intended to account for that, then presumably there has to be some way to track where the vehicle was driven.

But that opens the door to all sorts of other sinister problems. About four years ago a former colleague of mine was all for the idea until I looked at him and said, "OK, how will you feel when one night the police show up at your door and say, 'Mr. [Smith], there has been a wave of crime in a wealthy part of Potomac. Records showing cars driven in the area show you were in that neighborhood. You're black and that's a white neighborhood. Explain why you were there." He is indeed black, and when I posed this scenario he suddenly froze and his eyes went wide and he said, "Maybe it's NOT such a good idea." I tend to assume that regardless of what "safeguards" the law imposes on the data, it would be misused for other purposes or the law would quickly be amended to allow for other uses.

What if the all the money goes to the state your license plate says? Then you would just need to check the odometer.

But isn't part of the point of a VMT tax that you could eliminate the issue of someone who drives extensively in a state or other jurisdiction but never refuels there, such as (in the current world) someone who drives a lot in DC but always goes across to Virginia to take advantage of the lower gas tax?

[wanderer2575]

....

Better yet:  Fund everything through a VMT tax and get rid of tolls.

I've always disliked this idea because I assume it would mean some sort of location tracking in order to compensate each jurisdiction for the distance you drove in that state during a given period. That is, consider a college student who attends school out of state but keeps his car registered in his home state, or consider someone who travels out of state for vacation (say, the stereotypical drive down I-95 to Disney World) or to visit relatives. That person is putting wear and tear on other states' roads in the course of travel, and if the miles driven tax is intended to account for that, then presumably there has to be some way to track where the vehicle was driven.

[snip]

What if the all the money goes to the state your license plate says? Then you would just need to check the odometer.

That works only if there is an equal number of miles from residents of all states.  Pass-through states such as OH and IN would get the shaft because of having to maintain the toll roads from wear and tear without collecting corresponding revenue.

It's the same reason a lot of states don't have reciprocal income tax agreements with other states. even though they would be a convenience to people who work in one state and live in another.

[hotdogPi]

That works only if there is an equal number of miles from residents of all states.  Pass-through states such as OH and IN would get the shaft because of having to maintain the toll roads from wear and tear without collecting corresponding revenue.

You do realize that there are a disproportionately high number of trucks from Indiana, right? Indiana would probably be one of the states that benefits the most from this system.

[thspfc]

That works only if there is an equal number of miles from residents of all states.  Pass-through states such as OH and IN would get the shaft because of having to maintain the toll roads from wear and tear without collecting corresponding revenue.

You do realize that there are a disproportionately high number of trucks from Indiana, right? Indiana would probably be one of the states that benefits the most from this system.

Is that right? Come to think of it, it makes sense, I see so many semis with Indiana plates.

[1995hoo]

The subject line of this thread has me picturing Mr. Mackey from South Park saying "Toll roads are bad, m'kay?"

[J3ebrules]

I'm going to argue with the premise specifically in the case of the NJ Turnpike, which, for those of you who don't know, is a completely self-sufficient road that draws no tax money but uses its tolls for maintenance, policing, and construction. Also, it was originally planned that the Turnpike become "added to the state highways"  (in other words, go toll free) when the bonds were paid off, but that never occurred.

Because the NJ Turnpike (and yes, now the Garden State Parkway figures in, but for simplicity in making my case, I'll just refer to the Turnpike) is self-sufficient, the only people who pay for it are the people who use it.
Is that not ideal? NJ taxes are outrageous as they are - if only other public works could be so self-sufficient so as to decrease our tax burden! And, as many are pointing out, it's not just New Jerseyans who are feeling the hit - the out of state drivers are bringing THEIR money into the state and helpfully paying for the Turnpike's maintenance and construction etc etc.

So, I don't know if we can paint that broad a stroke against tolls. I'd love to know the story of the highway robbery on I-95 on the Delaware/Maryland border. You know; the one everyone famously shunpikes using 896 and by sneaking into Elkton? Far as I know, that stretch is as federally funded as any other generic interstate. They'd have to be funding therapeutic puppy camps for disabled children for me to feel anything but disdain for that particular toll!

[1995hoo]

....

So, I don't know if we can paint that broad a stroke against tolls. I'd love to know the story of the highway robbery on I-95 on the Delaware/Maryland border. You know; the one everyone famously shunpikes using 896 and by sneaking into Elkton? Far as I know, that stretch is as federally funded as any other generic interstate. They'd have to be funding therapeutic puppy camps for disabled children for me to feel anything but disdain for that particular toll!

Delaware originally financed the road by issuing bonds because if they had waited for the standard federal funding to make it a free Interstate, it was estimated to be at least another four years before the road would have been completed. Maryland likewise financed I-95 northeast of Baltimore via bonds because most of their highway funding had been consumed by other construction. The Delaware Turnpike, and the portion of I-95 in Maryland to which it connects, was dedicated by President Kennedy and the two states' governors on November 14, 1963, and the roads opened at midnight that night. That helps explain why the highway is now named for the President, given a certain event that occurred in Dallas a week later.

[kernals12]

I'm going to argue with the premise specifically in the case of the NJ Turnpike, which, for those of you who don't know, is a completely self-sufficient road that draws no tax money but uses its tolls for maintenance, policing, and construction. Also, it was originally planned that the Turnpike become "added to the state highways"  (in other words, go toll free) when the bonds were paid off, but that never occurred.

Because the NJ Turnpike (and yes, now the Garden State Parkway figures in, but for simplicity in making my case, I'll just refer to the Turnpike) is self-sufficient, the only people who pay for it are the people who use it.
Is that not ideal? NJ taxes are outrageous as they are - if only other public works could be so self-sufficient so as to decrease our tax burden! And, as many are pointing out, it's not just New Jerseyans who are feeling the hit - the out of state drivers are bringing THEIR money into the state and helpfully paying for the Turnpike's maintenance and construction etc etc.

So, I don't know if we can paint that broad a stroke against tolls. I'd love to know the story of the highway robbery on I-95 on the Delaware/Maryland border. You know; the one everyone famously shunpikes using 896 and by sneaking into Elkton? Far as I know, that stretch is as federally funded as any other generic interstate. They'd have to be funding therapeutic puppy camps for disabled children for me to feel anything but disdain for that particular toll!

Doesn't US 1 in New Jersey have massive traffic problems because of people avoiding the Pike's tolls?

[Rothman]

Regarding a VMT tax, I don't see why it couldn't be a federal tax that is distributed back to states based upon miles driven on their states.

[Max Rockatansky]

In a more serious answer I would agree that in Orlando all the toll roads push the majority of traffic onto I-4 and high capacity surface streets.  Problem was that Orlando (aside I-4) was left out of the spur Interstate game.  At minimum I would say the tolls in the Orlando Area (and really Florida) are fairly nominal compared to other areas. 

[1995hoo]

Regarding a VMT tax, I don't see why it couldn't be a federal tax that is distributed back to states based upon miles driven on their states.

Doesn't that more or less pose the same problem I noted earlier, though? How do you determine how many miles are driven in a respective state unless you have some way to track where vehicles are driven?

Doesn't US 1 in New Jersey have massive traffic problems because of people avoiding the Pike's tolls?

Why would a road in New Jersey have traffic problems because of tolls in Massachusetts (the state where people call their turnpike "the Pike")? 

[kernals12]

Regarding a VMT tax, I don't see why it couldn't be a federal tax that is distributed back to states based upon miles driven on their states.

Doesn't that more or less pose the same problem I noted earlier, though? How do you determine how many miles are driven in a respective state unless you have some way to track where vehicles are driven?

Doesn't US 1 in New Jersey have massive traffic problems because of people avoiding the Pike's tolls?

Why would a road in New Jersey have traffic problems because of tolls in Massachusetts (the state where people call their turnpike "the Pike")? 

No wonder taxes in Jersey are so high if they're wasting so much money on superfluous letters like that.

[SP Cook]

Toll roads are not per se "bad".  It is a valid way to build more roads more quickly.  However, poor government can lead to toll roads that do bad things.

- Of course, the only morally legitimate purpose of a toll is to pay for construction.  Use of tolls to force people to make life decisions other than those they wish, such as use communal transit or live in urban slums, is just as invalid as the use of any other tax to force anyone to do anything.  The J O B of government is to create the society that its citizens want.  If people want a suburban lifestyle then build more suburbs and more highways. 

- Toll agencies can be very profitable.  This leads to many paying above market wages for their employees, to triple featherbeded executive offices, and to diversion of money to boondoggle projects. 

- Many states use toll roads to create special sections of traffic cops.  Often made up of those who failed at serious police work and who should be fired. 

As to a VMT.  This could work, but really only if EVERY state, and perhaps even every province totally replaced the current fuel tax model with one.  Since governments cannot be trusted to do that, it cannot work and would thus be not a replacement tax but an additional tax, and taxation is theft. 

As to Indiana and trucking, this is an old wives' tale.  While you can drive a normal car or light truck anywhere in North America on a single jurisdiction's plates due to an international agreement, this does not apply to large commercial trucking.  Trucks must have "apportioned" plates.  While issued by a single jurisdiction, the fees are split between each jurisdiction in which the vehicle is authorized to operate.  Also these vehicles must have a IFTA sticker and file quarterly IFTA (International Fuel Tax Agreement) reports that shift fuel taxes from the collecting states where the fuel was purchased to where the truck was actually driven based on mileage.