If the legislation goes through as proposed, allowing 25 Interstate segments to be tolled, we Texans are in big trouble. Governor Perry and his toll henchmen are chomping at the bit to toll more freeways, especially high-volume interstates. What's worse, TxDOT is imposing some of the highest tolls in the nation, even for facilities that are fully financed by gasoline tax funds.
With Rick Perry in office until at least the end of 2006 and Bush around until Jan 2009, things could get very ugly here in Texas.
I just found a link to this article (April 10). I don't remember seeing it> on MTR>
If the legislation goes through as proposed, allowing 25 Interstate segments> to be tolled, we Texans are in big trouble. Governor Perry and his toll> henchmen are chomping at the bit to toll more freeways, especially> high-volume interstates. What's worse, TxDOT is imposing some of the highest> tolls in the nation, even for facilities that are fully financed by gasoline> tax funds.
25 Interstate segments nationwide, an average of one per every two states. I would surmise that the federal transportation bill would limit it to 2 segments per state at most. So probably Texas doesn't have too much to worry about here!
The article mentions that Virginia I-81 is the only application to date. That was under the rules of the 1998 federal transportation bill TEA-21, which is still in effect, and TEA-21 provides provision for up to 3 pilot toll projects to institute tolls on a toll-free Interstate highway for the purpose of paying for a major expansion of the highway.
In Virginia, there is one other Interstate corridor that I would like to see considered for tolling to pay for a major expansion, and that is the 91 miles of I-95 between I-295 north of Richmond and I-495/I-395 at Springfield. A minimum of 10 lanes, or even 12 lanes, on the whole route, would be worthwhile to have. Tolls on this segment of I-95 would help counterbalance any diversion of traffic from a tolled Virginia I-81 to I-95.
Christopher Blaney 3 May 2005 04:37:28 [ permanent link ]
"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@comcast.net> wrote in message news:4276AE79.B2B3F7C5@comcast.net...
In Virginia, there is one other Interstate corridor that I would like to> see considered for tolling to pay for a major expansion, and that is the> 91 miles of I-95 between I-295 north of Richmond and I-495/I-395 at> Springfield. A minimum of 10 lanes, or even 12 lanes, on the whole> route, would be worthwhile to have. Tolls on this segment of I-95 would> help counterbalance any diversion of traffic from a tolled Virginia I-81> to I-95.
I agree entirely, and it would seem that the entire Petersburg-New York corridor would be well served by 12+ lanes of Interstate highway or equivalent. Consider:
1. I-95/I-295 between Petersburg and Richmond is a local-express split with 12 lanes of traffic 2. I-95 between Richmond and Springfield could be made 12 lanes in a 3-3-3-3 local/express, with the express lanes being tolled 3. I-95/I-495 Capital Beltway could be made 14 lanes in 4-3-3-4 local/express, with the express lanes being tolled. 4. I-95 between Richmond and I-695 can be made 12 lanes in 3-3-3-3 local/express, with the express lanes being tolled 5. Through Baltimore, I-95/I-695/I-895 is 12 lanes equivalent and is probably good enough to serve traffic for many years to come. 6. JFK Highway could be made 12 lanes (3-3-3-3) in its entirety, with the express lanes paying tolls north and south and the local lanes only paying the current northbound toll at the Susquehanna River. 7. Delaware Turnpike and I-295 could be made 12 lanes (3-3-3-3), with the current toll structure. 8. I-95/I-495/I-295/NJ Turnpike provide 16 lanes equivalent between New Castle and Bristol, but adding two extra lanes to the NJ Turnpike between Exits 1 and 6 (to six lanes between Exits 1 and 4, and eight lanes between Exits 4 and 6) would be a good idea. Express I-95 should take over I-295 in Delaware and be signed along with the NJTP between Exits 1 and 6. 9. NJ Turnpike between Exit 6 and Exit 11 should be made 12 lanes wide (3-3-3-3). 10. NJ Turnpike between Exit 11 and 14 is already 14 lanes wide (4-3-3-4). 11. NJ Turnpike Western Spur should be made 12 lanes wide (4-3-3-4). 12. NJ Turnpike between Exit 18 and the GW Bridge should be made 14 lanes wide (4-3-3-4).
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as well, but> Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto any> present or future attempt to get such a bill through th legislature.>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If it's NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)
1) A fixed rate, "reasonable" per mile charge for the regular lanes.> 2) A high variable rate toll for the HOT reversable roadway, depending> on the amount of congestion in the regular lanes. This toll should be> high enough to discourage casual use of the HOV during rush hours.> When no congestion is present in the regular lanes, the same toll rate> as for the regular lanes applies.> 3) HOV 3+ rides for free in the HOV lanes at all times.
And please, no electric/hybrid car exemption!>
This assumes the reversable roadway is widened to three lanes and> extended (with only two lanes) down to F-burg.>
South of Fredericksburg, i'd revert to a single, lower toll rate for> all...because this stretch isn't as congested and in need of widening.> Perhaps i'd jack the rates up a bit nearer to Richmond.>
-- Steve Alpert MIT - Civil Engineering '05, MST '07 (Transportation)
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as well, but>> Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto any>> present or future attempt to get such a bill through th legislature.>>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If it's >NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)>
It was Virginia, actually. I don't think SC and certainly not NC ever had a toll on I-95.
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as well, but> > Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto any> > present or future attempt to get such a bill through th legislature.>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If it's> NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)
The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike ran for 34.7 miles from US-1 in Dinwiddie County VA to US-301 in Henrico County VA (from today's I-85 Exit 63 to I-95 Exit 82), it opened in 1958, was designated with the I-85 and I-95 designations, and it became toll-free in 1992.
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as well, but>> Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto any>> present or future attempt to get such a bill through th legislature.>>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If it's > NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)
Don't recall a toll at least when driving to Fayetteville... but I-95 *is* tolled through Maryland, first in Baltimore and then again farther north.
In article <seOdnVb-qakRwerfRVn-3w@comcast.com>, Nate Nagel <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote:
Steve wrote:>
Mike Tantillo wrote:> >
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as well, but> >> Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto any> >> present or future attempt to get such a bill through th legislature.> >>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If it's > > NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)>
Don't recall a toll at least when driving to Fayetteville... but I-95 > *is* tolled through Maryland, first in Baltimore and then again farther > north.
yes, at the tunnel and the bridge. At least we can hope some of the toll money goes to their upkeep. I have no idea what Delaware does with all the toll money from the 15 or 20 miles of I-95 that goes through that state.
Scott M. Kozel wrote:> Steve <smalpert@hackmit.edu> wrote:> >
Mike Tantillo wrote:> >
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as
well, but> > > Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto
present or future attempt to get such a bill through th
legislature.> >
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC? (If
it's> > NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it back.)>
The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike ran for 34.7 miles from US-1 in> Dinwiddie County VA to US-301 in Henrico County VA (from today's I-85> Exit 63 to I-95 Exit 82), it opened in 1958, was designated with the> I-85 and I-95 designations, and it became toll-free in 1992.
...on the same day that I-295 was finished. So even if the tolls remained, I-95 through traffic wouldn't have to pay it. Thats probably the reason the booths came down that day!
The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike ran for 34.7 miles from US-1 in> > Dinwiddie County VA to US-301 in Henrico County VA (from today's I-85> > Exit 63 to I-95 Exit 82), it opened in 1958, was designated with the> > I-85 and I-95 designations, and it became toll-free in 1992.>
...on the same day that I-295 was finished. So even if the tolls> remained, I-95 through traffic wouldn't have to pay it. Thats probably> the reason the booths came down that day!
The toll removal occurred in stages. The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike's I-85 portion become toll-free in 1986, and the mainline Dinwiddie County Toll Plaza near US-1 west of Petersburg was removed then. A 1989 CTB toll increase decision also provided for the removal of the I-95 Washington Street toll plaza in Petersburg, thereby making toll-free the I-95 portion of the Turnpike south of the Southpark Boulevard interchange, and also provided for the removal of the ramp toll plazas in the City of Richmond at the I-95/I-64/I-195 Bryan Park interchange and at VA-161 Boulevard, thereby making toll-free the I-95 portion of the Turnpike north of Boulevard. The remainder of the RPT went toll-free in July 1992, between VA-161 Boulevard and Colonial Heights.
The local governments wanted the Turnpike to become toll-free when the bonds were paid off. It was recognized that a traffic imbalance would occur with I-295 toll-free and I-95 tolled, so agreement was reached that when I-295 opened, the RPT tolls would cease. That agreement was honored.
The 36-mile-long Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike was opened in 1958, and the original toll revenue bonds were retired in 1975. Six-lane widening was completed on 22 miles of the RPT in 1978, and its 1974-issue toll revenue bonds were retired in 1988. The tolls were retained until the parallel I-295 beltway (a toll-free Interstate) was completed in 1992, because of concerns of increased traffic overloading the RPT which was already near capacity in central Richmond.
The last 4 years of toll revenue (mostly Northerner and Floridian toll revenue since the locals could buy heavily discounted commuter tickets) was used to build 5 local road projects (part of VA-288, part of the Temple Avenue Extension, the Leigh Street Extension, the widening of Belt Boulevard, and the Parham-Chippenham Connector).
The toll extension and the usage of its revenue was accomplished via special legislation of the General Assembly.
All I can say is, wow. That's a good chunk of their highway budget that is funded by toll revenue. (Of course this comes from me, who lives in a state where virtually the only toll 'roads' are bridges...)
yes, at the tunnel and the bridge. At least we can hope some of the toll> > money goes to their upkeep. I have no idea what Delaware does with all> > the toll money from the 15 or 20 miles of I-95 that goes through that > > state.>
All I can say is, wow. That's a good chunk of their highway budget> that is funded by toll revenue.
That is not completely surprising, given the way that those two highways dominate the state's highway system, and given the amount of toll revenue bonds used to finance them that are still outstanding.
Justin Priola wrote:> Chris Smolinski wrote:> > In article <seOdnVb-qakRwerfRVn-3w@comcast.com>,> > Nate Nagel <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote:> >
Steve wrote:> > >
Mike Tantillo wrote:> > > >
North Carolina proposed to submit an application for I-95 as> well, but> > > >> Gov. Easley shot that down pretty quickly saying he would veto> any> > > >> present or future attempt to get such a bill through th> legislature.> > > >>
I thought I-95 WAS once tolled through NC? Or was that SC?
(If> it's> > > > NC, I understand why it would be political suicide to bring it> back.)> > >
Don't recall a toll at least when driving to Fayetteville... but> I-95> > > *is* tolled through Maryland, first in Baltimore and then again> farther> > > north.> >
yes, at the tunnel and the bridge. At least we can hope some of the> toll> > money goes to their upkeep. I have no idea what Delaware does with> all> > the toll money from the 15 or 20 miles of I-95 that goes through
All I can say is, wow. That's a good chunk of their highway budget> that is funded by toll revenue. (Of course this comes from me, who> lives in a state where virtually the only toll 'roads' are
bridges...)>
Dang....
Thank goodness DE really does a fantastic job of ensuring that one can easily drive around their tolls. I-95's....easily bypassed. DE 1's Biddles Corner plaza....you can still take the bridge and bypass the toll, and if you take US 13 south only as far as Odessa (you're off DE 1 for no more then about 5 miles or so), you can get back on for free! The Dover toll is the only one thats not as easily avoided (due to the ubiquitous ramp tolls at the exits north of Dover).
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please . Если Вы хотите пожаловаться на содержимое этой страницы, пожалуйста .
