Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NJRoadfan]

The tolling being biased as northbound enter/southbound exit is what makes the "mainline" toll so high. The position of the gantries would have solved this problem. Being a strictly AET roadway, they could have even tolled based on actual use like a closed ticket system (but at the cost of extra gantries).

[sprjus4]

There isn't a truck ban on US 40.  The link above is for oversized/overweight trucks, which there are extremely few of.  They usually have a banner stating oversize/over width.

The everyday tractor trailers you see on the highways are perfectly legal on US 40.

That's what I thought.
__________________________________

Speak Out: U.S. 301 opens

• $4 is the toll at the Delaware/Maryland state line for using I-95 — which is about the same length from state line to state line (Maryland to Pennsylvania) And you can easily avoid that toll, just like you can on this road. — Brian P Slattery

He clearly isn't familiar with the area; particularly the Warwick, MD side.  Yes. there's a shun-pike route (except for thru-trucks) with no traffic signals but portions, mainly Strawberry Lane/Wilson St. & Sassafrass Rd. are very narrow two-lane roads w/no shoulders.
___________________________________

In case anyone's interested, here's DelDOT's Official Toll Calculator for US 301.

In a nutshell, northbound travelers from MD are paying the full-toll rate ($4 E-ZPass/$5.60 Toll-By-Plate) regardless of where one exits off 301.

I totally want to pay $4 to ride a mile of this new highway, makes a lot of sense!!

[Alps]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be an issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

[davewiecking]

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

Not that I want to derail this thread further, but I’m curious about the “ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement” step. Rebar or mesh messes up the pass readers?

[Alps]

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

Not that I want to derail this thread further, but I’m curious about the “ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement” step. Rebar or mesh messes up the pass readers?

Yup, electromagnetic stuff or whatever. Interferes with reading the signature of a passing car. It's not derailing the thread at all.

[Roadsguy]

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

Not that I want to derail this thread further, but I’m curious about the “ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement” step. Rebar or mesh messes up the pass readers?

Yup, electromagnetic stuff or whatever. Interferes with reading the signature of a passing car. It's not derailing the thread at all.

Huh, so all concrete below electronic toll gantries has no rebar?

[Tonytone]

Did they really clearly find out the information regarding, how the people that live in the area would feel about the toll? I assume since Maryland does no part in helping with projects, Delaware will toll the hell out the people.

But as far as the tolls If they move the gantry pass the exit they are talking about, could you imagine how many people would get off at that toll less exit, probably about 75% of the cars including the trucks. Then the exit is backing up & causing backups on the highway, then thats a whole new issue. When I drive on De-1 on the weekdays, when the toll is $1 I see only a few people get off the exit, but when that toll sign goes to $3 on the weekend, sheesh that exit almost gets backed up thats how many cars & trucks get off, but luckily the ramp is a mega ramp or there would be serious problems.

The best bet would be....

A.turn Edgar price aka Levels road, into a stable 2 lane road or 3 lane , 2 lane NB 1 lane SB, straighten the road out at some parts & put a couple new traffic signals on it to slow down traffic & create new neighborhoods & etc. That option would work if Maryland did their half.

B. Create an interchange with the New 301 & Old 301. With ramps for trucks to access the weigh station, create another roundabout with strawberry lane. With new neighborhoods on levels road, they might need to put a local traffic only sign so trucks don’t crash going around the roundabout.

C. Keep it simple, just move the gantries or eliminate the toll or lower it. Just do it how Route 1 is done.

For all the trouble if Route 1’s toll was that high, there would be no toll on that road.


iPhone

[PHLBOS]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be a issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

That being the case, then DelDOT should have thought of that prior to installing the current mainline gantries.  This current set-up is clearly on them.

Additionally, if such were to happen via a court order; it wouldn't be the first time that AET gantries were removed.  Remember the RI 24 Sakonnet River Bridge AET/toll fiasco of several years ago?  Those gantries have since been removed (but later reused for one of the I-95 truck toll gantries).

Another alternative that would achieve the same above-result would be to extend the northbound exit & southbound entry ramps at Exit 2 further south beyond the mainline AET gantries.  Such would be an interesting cost comparison.

[jeffandnicole]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be a issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

That being the case, then DelDOT should have thought of that prior to installing the current mainline gantries.  This current set-up is clearly on them.

Well, yeah, they planned it that way.  It's not like the contractor placed them in the wrong spot.

[PHLBOS]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be a issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

That being the case, then DelDOT should have thought of that prior to installing the current mainline gantries.  This current set-up is clearly on them.

Well, yeah, they planned it that way.  It's not like the contractor placed them in the wrong spot.

I asked this before upthread and I'll restate it again.  One has to wonder how much input did neighboring Warwick, MD really have when the southern leg was designed & planned.  I can't believe for one nanosecond that the town officials & resident was 100% okay with this setup... especially given that two of the local feeder roads (Wilson St./Strawberry Ln. & Sassafrass Rd.) are narrow 2-laners w/no shoulders.

[ixnay]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be a issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

That being the case, then DelDOT should have thought of that prior to installing the current mainline gantries.  This current set-up is clearly on them.

Well, yeah, they planned it that way.  It's not like the contractor placed them in the wrong spot.

I asked this before upthread and I'll restate it again.  One has to wonder how much input did neighboring Warwick, MD really have when the southern leg was designed & planned.  I can't believe for one nanosecond that the town officials & resident was 100% okay with this setup... especially given that two of the local feeder roads (Wilson St./Strawberry Ln. & Sassafrass Rd.) are narrow 2-laners w/no shoulders.

I don't think they consulted folks in Cecilton, Fredericktown, Georgetown, or Galena either.  Nor Cecil County nor Kent County (MD) authorities.  As for town officials in Warwick, that's an unincorporated town, as are Fredericktown and Georgetown.  Cecilton and Galena are incorporated.

ixnay

[PHLBOS]

Back to the topic at hand: after looking at the southern portion a tad more closely; I am modifying my earlier recommendation to relocate of the mainline US 301 AET gantries north of Exit 2 (DE 299) to instead relocate them within said-interchange.  That way local traffic to/from Warwick, MD along US 301 isn't forced to pay a $4.00/$5.60 toll just for crossing the state-line.  Since these are just gantries and not toll booths; relocating/repositioning them shouldn't be a issue. 

New foundations and gantries (have to keep the current ones in service) plus the power feeds to get out there, testing, ripping up pavement to remove metallic reinforcement... Millions. Not a cakewalk.

That being the case, then DelDOT should have thought of that prior to installing the current mainline gantries.  This current set-up is clearly on them.

Well, yeah, they planned it that way.  It's not like the contractor placed them in the wrong spot.

I asked this before upthread and I'll restate it again.  One has to wonder how much input did neighboring Warwick, MD really have when the southern leg was designed & planned.  I can't believe for one nanosecond that the town officials & resident was 100% okay with this setup... especially given that two of the local feeder roads (Wilson St./Strawberry Ln. & Sassafrass Rd.) are narrow 2-laners w/no shoulders.

I don't think they consulted folks in Cecilton, Fredericktown, Georgetown, or Galena either.  Nor Cecil County nor Kent County (MD) authorities.  As for town officials in Warwick, that's an unincorporated town, as are Fredericktown and Georgetown.  Cecilton and Galena are incorporated.

Bottom line: it would appear that nobody in the abutting County (Cecil) and its directly-impacted municipalities were fully consulted with regards to where toll charges would along the new tollway would start.

[hbelkins]

Would Delaware have been under any obligation to consult with Maryland's local governments before proceeding?

[MASTERNC]

When I drive on De-1 on the weekdays, when the toll is $1 I see only a few people get off the exit, but when that toll sign goes to $3 on the weekend, sheesh that exit almost gets backed up thats how many cars & trucks get off, but luckily the ramp is a mega ramp or there would be serious problems.

Don't even get me started about the year-round weekend toll differential.  Should be limited to tourism season.  I imagine most of the weekend revenue comes from May-September.

[Tonytone]

When I drive on De-1 on the weekdays, when the toll is $1 I see only a few people get off the exit, but when that toll sign goes to $3 on the weekend, sheesh that exit almost gets backed up thats how many cars & trucks get off, but luckily the ramp is a mega ramp or there would be serious problems.

Don't even get me started about the year-round weekend toll differential.  Should be limited to tourism season.  I imagine most of the weekend revenue comes from May-September.

I always wondered if they can limit it to tourists months, but that might be illegal? Why didn’t they do the tolling they have on De -1 on the 301? Why just a flat out $4 rate? Because it’s a new highway? They should have looked at all perspectives. But then again Maryland is the reason the Newark beltway (another post) didnt get built.


iPhone

[sprjus4]

I always wondered if they can limit it to tourists months, but that might be illegal?

It's not illegal, Chesapeake, VA raises the toll rates during summer weekends from $3 to $8 on the Chesapeake Expressway (VA-168). There's been talks of increasing it to $9, and the regular rate to $4.

Also, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel increases rates from $14 to $18 during summer weekends.

[PHLBOS]

I always wondered if they can limit it to tourists months, but that might be illegal? Why didn’t they do the tolling they have on De -1 on the 301? Why just a flat out $4 rate?

Apples & oranges comparison.  It is presumed that the majority of traffic on the new US 301 will be through-traffic (think I-95 further north) not tourist/coast-bound traffic (like DE 1); and its toll schedule clearly reflects such... more on that in a bit.  It's also worth noting that the tolled stretch of DE 1 originally did not have the higher, extortion rate weekend tolls.; such came later (I forget exactly when).

They should have looked at all perspectives.

Agreed.  IMHO & especially since the road's AET; DelDOT, in addition to placing the mainline AET gantries within Exit 2/DE 299, should've either tolled it like the NJ Turnpike (completely closed system where one entry onto the road is recorded by the first E-ZPass gantry & is charged an appropriate distance-based toll upon exiting via another E-ZPass gantry) or how the Mass Pike (I-90) is now tolled in MA (AET gantries placed along the mainline in-between interchanges and charge a flat-rate toll). 

The way the road is currently tolled; using it for travel in-between the interchanges is flat-out discouraged.

[seicer]

That might have been the intent, though. It should be discouraged to use freeways as short-haul modes of transport (i.e. exit to exit).

[jeffandnicole]

Would Delaware have been under any obligation to consult with Maryland's local governments before proceeding?

In order for this project to get funding, they would've first brought it up with the area's Metropolitan Planning Commission. In this case it would be the Wilmington Area Planning Council (WILMAPCO) regional transportation planning agency, which serves New Castle County, DE and Cecil County, MD.  As this new 301 goes thru both counties, it absolutely would have been discussed with both states beforehand, and any affected area's government would have had the opportunity to provide input into the project.

[vdeane]

IMHO & especially since the road's AET; DelDOT, in addition to placing the mainline AET gantries within Exit 2/DE 299, should've either tolled it like the NJ Turnpike (completely closed system where one entry onto the road is recorded by the first E-ZPass gantry & is charged an appropriate distance-based toll upon exiting via another E-ZPass gantry) or how the Mass Pike (I-90) is now tolled in MA (AET gantries placed along the mainline in-between interchanges and charge a flat-rate toll). 

The way the road is currently tolled; using it for travel in-between the interchanges is flat-out discouraged.

Definitely (well, aside from putting the gantry inside exit 2 - I would put it north of exit 2; putting it inside the interchange only encourages traffic to shunpike by getting off and then back on again).  The current tolling scheme is asinine.

[PHLBOS]

IMHO & especially since the road's AET; DelDOT, in addition to placing the mainline AET gantries within Exit 2/DE 299, should've either tolled it like the NJ Turnpike (completely closed system where one entry onto the road is recorded by the first E-ZPass gantry & is charged an appropriate distance-based toll upon exiting via another E-ZPass gantry) or how the Mass Pike (I-90) is now tolled in MA (AET gantries placed along the mainline in-between interchanges and charge a flat-rate toll). 

The way the road is currently tolled; using it for travel in-between the interchanges is flat-out discouraged.

Definitely (well, aside from putting the gantry inside exit 2 - I would put it north of exit 2; putting it inside the interchange only encourages traffic to shunpike by getting off and then back on again).

The southbound exit/northbound entrance ramps at Exit 2 presently have AET gantries that charges $1 E-ZPass/$1.40 Toll-By-Plate.  Nowhere in my prior posts was I advocating the removal of those; I was only suggesting the relocation of the mainline gantry that's currently south of Exit 2 to allow for one last real exit prior to the mainline toll for all vehicles coming to/from Maryland... just like there is further north along I-95.

The current tolling scheme is asinine.

Agree with you 100% on that one.

[Tonytone]

Maybe this will force maryland to build a exit ramp and upgrade their back roads. Only other reasonable option.


iPhone

[vdeane]

The southbound exit/northbound entrance ramps at Exit 2 presently have AET gantries that charges $1 E-ZPass/$1.40 Toll-By-Plate.  Nowhere in my prior posts was I advocating the removal of those; I was only suggesting the relocation of the mainline gantry that's currently south of Exit 2 to allow for one last real exit prior to the mainline toll for all vehicles coming to/from Maryland... just like there is further north along I-95.

Well, if the gantry was north of exit 2, then there would be no need for the ramp gantries.  In any case, $1 is less than $3.

If I were doing it, there would be three gantries, one between each interchange, with MD to exit 2 free.  Alternatively, a variant of the NH Turnpike model could work, with a gantry inside the DE 71 interchange, gantries on the ramps of said interchange, and a gantry between Jamison Corners Road and DE 1.

[PHLBOS]

The southbound exit/northbound entrance ramps at Exit 2 presently have AET gantries that charges $1 E-ZPass/$1.40 Toll-By-Plate.  Nowhere in my prior posts was I advocating the removal of those; I was only suggesting the relocation of the mainline gantry that's currently south of Exit 2 to allow for one last real exit prior to the mainline toll for all vehicles coming to/from Maryland... just like there is further north along I-95.

Well, if the gantry was north of exit 2, then there would be no need for the ramp gantries.

Since it's DelDOT's intent to charge through-traffic southbounders more for staying on US 301 vs. leaving at Exit 2; the two gantries, one along the exit ramp, the other being the through-traffic one along the mainline would be the only way to accomplish such without adding additional gantries.  As stated several & multiple posts back, my reasoning for moving the mainline AET gantries within/inside Exit 2 is so that traffic to/from that interchange south to MD via US 301 is not subject to paying a ridiculously high $4/$5.60 toll to ride just over 2 miles.

In any case, $1 is less than $3 $4

FTFY

The likely reasoning behind DelDOT charging $4 is to match the corresponding I-95 toll in Newark.  If a lower through-traffic toll (say $3 for example) was levied for US 301; such would have the potential of diverting more traffic (& revenue) away from those I-95 tollbooths than DelDOT wants.

[Tonytone]

The southbound exit/northbound entrance ramps at Exit 2 presently have AET gantries that charges $1 E-ZPass/$1.40 Toll-By-Plate.  Nowhere in my prior posts was I advocating the removal of those; I was only suggesting the relocation of the mainline gantry that's currently south of Exit 2 to allow for one last real exit prior to the mainline toll for all vehicles coming to/from Maryland... just like there is further north along I-95.

Well, if the gantry was north of exit 2, then there would be no need for the ramp gantries.

Since it's DelDOT's intent to charge through-traffic southbounders more for staying on US 301 vs. leaving at Exit 2; the two gantries, one along the exit ramp, the other being the through-traffic one along the mainline would be the only way to accomplish such without adding additional gantries.  As stated several & multiple posts back, my earlier reasoning for moving the mainline AET gantries within/inside Exit 2 is so that traffic to/from that interchange south to MD via US 301 are not subject to paying a ridiculously high $4/$5.60 toll to ride just over 2 miles.

In any case, $1 is less than $3 $4

FTFY

The likely reasoning behind DelDOT charging $4 is to match the corresponding I-95 toll in Newark.  If a lower through-traffic toll (say $3 for example) was levied for US 301; such would have the potential of diverting more traffic (& revenue) away from those I-95 tollbooths than DelDOT wants.

Im shocked that Delaware wouldnt want traffic to go on the 301 to create new growth in the area, but even if they match the toll, I-95 traffic will still go That way & they already are paying the $4 plus more, I believe the 301 route is cheaper then 95 correct me if im wrong?

Also they did sign the tolls in MD, so it will be a while before people realize & put the word out.

iPhone