Breezewood

[formulanone]

What Internet Memes Get Wrong

Nearly everything.

[ekt8750]

You would be better off writing to the town council as I am sure if any of us boycott the town, none of them would feel the pinch! 

Not part of any city or town.

Breezewood is in East Providence Township in Bedford County, Pennsylvania.

IOW Breezewood is an unincorporated place.

ixnay

Technically yes as Breezewood doesn't goven itself, but it does lie within an incorporated municipality (as does every other parcel of land within the Commonwealth) so there is a government to complain to, the aforementioned East Providence Twp. You'd want to contact the commissioner who represents the ward Breezwood lies in which I'm sure the Breezewood business owners already have deep in their collective pockets.

[kphoger]

And tell them what, exactly?  That you refuse to shop there because you don't like the incomplete interchange?  I'm sure they would put you in the scales against all the hundreds of people who do shop there every year precisely because there's an incomplete interchange, and I don't wonder what conclusion they would come to.

[Plutonic Panda]

And tell them what, exactly?  That you refuse to shop there because you don't like the incomplete interchange?  I'm sure they would put you in the scales against all the hundreds of people who do shop there every year precisely because there's an incomplete interchange, and I don't wonder what conclusion they would come to.

The powers that be need to come together and build this fucking thing for betterment of society. Hours and gas lost, unnecessary emissions, preventable accidents, etc. all because horrible politics. I don't blame the business owners for trying to keep things the same. It's the government that allows it.

[theroadwayone]

I just looked at this, and damn, I didn't expect the thread to get this long.

[Mr_Northside]

You would be better off writing to the town council as I am sure if any of us boycott the town, none of them would feel the pinch! 

The more assured way to go about it (though totally impractical) would be to move there to be able to actually vote.
As noted - impractical.

[jeffandnicole]

You would be better off writing to the town council as I am sure if any of us boycott the town, none of them would feel the pinch! 

The more assured way to go about it (though totally impractical) would be to move there to be able to actually vote.
As noted - impractical.

Vote for what?  A politician that would send a letter to the PTC saying that they should create a normal interchange there?

If you were to move there, you would probably be far away from your job.  Or looking for work. Which means the very area that one would want bypassed would be their source of income. 

Suddenly, now you want people stopping to visit the business you work at!

[ixnay]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3768506/posts

ixnay

[kphoger]

And tell them what, exactly?  That you refuse to shop there because you don't like the incomplete interchange?  I'm sure they would put you in the scales against all the hundreds of people who do shop there every year precisely because there's an incomplete interchange, and I don't wonder what conclusion they would come to.

The powers that be need to come together and build this fucking thing for betterment of society. Hours and gas lost, unnecessary emissions, preventable accidents, etc. all because horrible politics. I don't blame the business owners for trying to keep things the same. It's the government that allows it.

I'm pretty sure that the local politicians' view of "betterment of society" does not include causing their slice of society to lose business.

[hbelkins]

And tell them what, exactly?  That you refuse to shop there because you don't like the incomplete interchange?  I'm sure they would put you in the scales against all the hundreds of people who do shop there every year precisely because there's an incomplete interchange, and I don't wonder what conclusion they would come to.

The powers that be need to come together and build this fucking thing for betterment of society. Hours and gas lost, unnecessary emissions, preventable accidents, etc. all because horrible politics. I don't blame the business owners for trying to keep things the same. It's the government that allows it.

I'm pretty sure that the local politicians' view of "betterment of society" does not include causing their slice of society to lose business.

I actually don't think Breezewood would lose much business if a direct connection was built. People who need gas will still get gas; people who are hungry will still want food; and people who are sleepy will still want a motel room. There's nothing convenient to I-70 between Breezewood and at least Hagerstown, if not Frederick. Most of the Hagerstown services are located on I-81 north of I-70, farther away than US 30 woul be from a direct Breezewood connection. Breezewood isn't booming like it once was, so it's not like there are a plethora of customers stopping there as it is because traffic is bad.

[Plutonic Panda]

And tell them what, exactly?  That you refuse to shop there because you don't like the incomplete interchange?  I'm sure they would put you in the scales against all the hundreds of people who do shop there every year precisely because there's an incomplete interchange, and I don't wonder what conclusion they would come to.

The powers that be need to come together and build this fucking thing for betterment of society. Hours and gas lost, unnecessary emissions, preventable accidents, etc. all because horrible politics. I don't blame the business owners for trying to keep things the same. It's the government that allows it.

I'm pretty sure that the local politicians' view of "betterment of society" does not include causing their slice of society to lose business.

Society extends to broader range than their town.

[noelbotevera]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-I-78 in Jersey City
-US 31 in Benton Harbor, Michigan
-CA 2 in Los Angeles
-The Bedford Interchange

[Beltway]

I actually don't think Breezewood would lose much business if a direct connection was built. People who need gas will still get gas; people who are hungry will still want food; and people who are sleepy will still want a motel room. There's nothing convenient to I-70 between Breezewood and at least Hagerstown, if not Frederick. Most of the Hagerstown services are located on I-81 north of I-70, farther away than US 30 woul be from a direct Breezewood connection. Breezewood isn't booming like it once was, so it's not like there are a plethora of customers stopping there as it is because traffic is bad.

Using my Turnpike/I-70 connection scheme, Breezewood could actually be a nice easily accessible large oasis for travelers who want any of a variety of services.  Lot less congestion there as well.

But due to their recalcitrance about connecting it, I absolutely refuse to do business there. 

That's they own dumbness.

[jeffandnicole]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-I-78 in Jersey City
-US 31 in Benton Harbor, Michigan
-CA 2 in Los Angeles
-The Bedford Interchange

When most people say they avoid the area, they pretty much wouldn't have been nearby anyway, or other options are just as if not more useful and convenient.  It's like saying I'm going from New Jersey to Virginia but I'll drive a route that'll allow me to avoid North Korea.   

[Strider]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-I-78 in Jersey City
-US 31 in Benton Harbor, Michigan
-CA 2 in Los Angeles
-The Bedford Interchange

The US 31 part in Benton Harbor, MI will no longer be a part of the list. MDOT is going to build the direct connection from the current stub end north to I-94/I-196 interchange next year.

[Alps]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-I-78 in Jersey City
-US 31 in Benton Harbor, Michigan
-CA 2 in Los Angeles
-The Bedford Interchange

The US 31 part in Benton Harbor, MI will no longer be a part of the list. MDOT is going to build the direct connection from the current stub end north to I-94/I-196 interchange next year.

False -  northwest to a separate interchange. There will be a concurrency on 94.

[Strider]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-I-78 in Jersey City
-US 31 in Benton Harbor, Michigan
-CA 2 in Los Angeles
-The Bedford Interchange

The US 31 part in Benton Harbor, MI will no longer be a part of the list. MDOT is going to build the direct connection from the current stub end north to I-94/I-196 interchange next year.

False -  northwest to a separate interchange. There will be a concurrency on 94.

You got this right. I was wrong after checking the official website. My apologizes.

[Rothman]

Comparing Breezewood to US 31 is ridiculous.  There is nothing at the end of that stub and traffic is much, much lower than what travels though that congested mess at Breezewood.  It's little wonder people don't complain about it as much As Breezewood.

In terms of I-78, where the solution would be to demolish Jersey City itself, it is also little wonder that people are more willing to accept the status quo.

[jeffandnicole]

Comparing Breezewood to US 31 is ridiculous.  There is nothing at the end of that stub and traffic is much, much lower than what travels though that congested mess at Breezewood.  It's little wonder people don't complain about it as much As Breezewood.

In terms of I-78, where the solution would be to demolish Jersey City itself, it is also little wonder that people are more willing to accept the status quo.

Breezewood happens to be in an area where many of us can travel thru.  I-78 isnt.

[Beltway]

Breezewood happens to be in an area where many of us can travel thru.  I-78 isnt.

That happens to be at the very end of I-78 where it ends anyway a couple miles from the section in question.

I-70 is a major Interstate highway that crosses most of the country east-west and connects many major metro areas.

[jeffandnicole]

Breezewood happens to be in an area where many of us can travel thru.  I-78 isnt.

That happens to be at the very end of I-78 where it ends anyway a couple miles from the section in question.

I-70 is a major Interstate highway that crosses most of the country east-west and connects many major metro areas.

But people aren't upset about I-70 across most of the country.  The specific area people don't like is where there's traffic lights.  Just like the other examples given that people constantly provide excuses for.

[jakeroot]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-CA 2 in Los Angeles

I'm not sure I follow. The 2 doesn't have any signals along its freeway stretch. Yes, the mainlines are flanked by signals on either end, but not every freeway has to end at an interchange. The problem is having a continuous freeway interrupted by traffic lights.

[noelbotevera]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-CA 2 in Los Angeles

I'm not sure I follow. The 2 doesn't have any signals along its freeway stretch. Yes, the mainlines are flanked by signals on either end, but not every freeway has to end at an interchange. The problem is having a continuous freeway interrupted by traffic lights.

It doesn't completely connect to US 101, ending a couple blocks short of it. There's many traffic lights to traverse before you reach US 101. It's probably a bad example of a Breezewood, more akin to a stub ending.

[Beltway]

Breezewood happens to be in an area where many of us can travel thru.  I-78 isnt.

That happens to be at the very end of I-78 where it ends anyway a couple miles from the section in question.
I-70 is a major Interstate highway that crosses most of the country east-west and connects many major metro areas.

But people aren't upset about I-70 across most of the country.  The specific area people don't like is where there's traffic lights.  Just like the other examples given that people constantly provide excuses for.

People that don't use it would have little or no knowledge of it.

People traveling between Washington, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, etc., that pass thru Breezewood, would have knowledge of it.

[jakeroot]

I don't even know why Breezewood gets roadgeeks so worked up. It's two traffic lights on an interstate in the middle of nowhere, barely causing any traffic. So what? I see nobody complaining about

-CA 2 in Los Angeles

I'm not sure I follow. The 2 doesn't have any signals along its freeway stretch. Yes, the mainlines are flanked by signals on either end, but not every freeway has to end at an interchange. The problem is having a continuous freeway interrupted by traffic lights.

It doesn't completely connect to US 101, ending a couple blocks short of it. There's many traffic lights to traverse before you reach US 101. It's probably a bad example of a Breezewood, more akin to a stub ending.

I see what you're thinking. It's more of just a generic stub ending, IMO. I am certainly aware of the original plans for the 2, where it was to connect to the 101 and become the Beverly Hills Freeway. But it's not like it peters out a few blocks from the 101. It's still about 1.5 miles and seven-ish traffic lights away. Plus, unlike the other examples, the 2-101 connection is not a continuous roadway with some signals in the middle, where the "fix" is obvious. With the 2, there's no obvious route to the 101 beyond the current arterial, ergo no obvious fix to the issue. They could complete the original interchange location plan, near Vermont Ave, but they'd have to demolish half of Silver Lake to do that.