55 replies to this topic

[blueblackcat]

Toll roads sound like they might be a good idea in an introductory economics class when talking about the conflicts between public goods and supply and demand... the idea is that there are "cheaters" who do not contribute to the maintenance of the good but who use it all up themselves and leave little for others.  

But beyond that, in reality, I think there are huge problems with making toll roads work.

For instance, instead of making interstate commercial trucking pay for the damage they cause to the roads... the trucking firms have powerful lobbies that turn this around and force passenger vehicles subsidize commercial traffic by paying a disproportionately higher toll rate relative to the damage they cause to the road.  This helps make it an apples and oranges comparison to the rider fees we pay for mass transit... mass transit fees make it more affordable for seniors, youth, and low-wage workers to access transportation... toll roads accomplish the opposite.

Another reason why toll roads are a bad idea is because of the self-perpetuating cycle they create.  The revenue from toll roads doesn't go directly to the state to get distributed on all forms of transportation... the money is channeled to support the toll road first, other projects second.  The toll road is always going to be in better shape than the other infrastructure that supposedly benefit from it.  If toll roads are an alternative to raising revenue through taxes, then they are unfairly benefiting the toll road system itself and hurting other modes of transportation.  If it happens to be the case that the public can benefit from other projects more than they would from interstate style limited access highways, then toll roads become regressive in nature.

Yet another reason why toll roads are bad is because of the unhealthy fiscal conditions that usually make them "seem" like a good idea.  Legislators who are under immense pressure to keep taxes low by subsidizing them with toll revenues are under just as much pressure to lease it out to private investors for short term budgetary gains but at huge, huge losses to taxpayers.  

Some of this could be resolved if we forced our government to keep track of assets and liabilities the same way as corporations do... a $100billion highway that gets sold for $3billion should add up in the government's budget as a $97billion loss... instead, it gets counted as a $3billion gain.  Another change I really agree with is to force all commercial traffic to buy permits to drive through the state - whether on free OR toll roads... the same way that boaters or fishermen must get permits in order to make use of public resources.  The problem is that politicians and lobby groups are both naturally against these solutions.  They'd rather have toll roads...

[g-man430]

seicer, on Mar 1 2007, 10:59 AM, said:

Not if they were funded by federal government. The FHWA restricts tolling on federally-funded interstates. This does not apply to new interstates funded through public-private partnerships or toll-road financing, such as Interstate 185 (Southern Connector) near Greenville, South Carolina. There are exceptions to this, such as the West Virginia Turnpike, due to the excessive construction costs due to the rugged terrain. An interstate number may be applied to already-existing toll roads, such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike or the New Jersey Turnpike.

Hey, I live in Greenville.

Edited by g-man430, 02 March 2007 - 10:16 PM.

[ohioaninSC]

I would have to say the from the # of times I've driven the WV TPK, I would gladly pay 3x as much in tolls , if they would fix that road up.  I've never had really horrible traffic on it whenever I've driven it, so I don't think they necessarily need to widen it, but they sure as heck need to completely redo it and soon.  It is scary enough if it was in good shape w/ all the roller coaster curves and hills going up and around the mountains there.  Of course, some of that scenery is beautiful too.  
Honestly, I've never stopped at Tamarack, except to grab bite to eat in the food court(don't think it is the same food as The Greenbriar though, they have Sbarro's and Quiznos which is what I usually get) and to let my dog do her business.  I usually have her w/ me when I'm going to back to OH to see the family.
I overall have no problems w/ toll roads.

[FromCityToRural]

I refuse to drive on toll roads. Part of this is the mentality of where I grew up, there were absolutely no toll roads except for bridges. I will go out of my way to avoid one as well. There's normally a free road either fronting it or nearby that will go where you're going. Only reason toll roads exist is that there's actually folks who are OTL enough to drive on them and pay the tolls. In the case of the one here in Tyler (Toll Loop 49), it was touted as a faster way to I-20 and Dallas, but if you measure it, you're still faster if you take (free) state highway 64 to I-20 and on to Dallas...to date, I haven't seen anyone on Loop 49.

Or, in the case of Dallas, there's a toll highway that just opened up that heads North to Frisco. There's also a frontage road that's almost as fast - and is free. And yet, there were folks who drove on the toll road. Never ceases to amaze me.

Edited by FromCityToRural, 28 March 2007 - 02:55 PM.

[Lowerdeck]

Being from Connecticut, toll booths are a love hate relationship.  While it would be nice to tax all the out of state traffic on I-95 and other highways for burdening our roads, we burden ourselves by having to stop at certain points.

In 1983, a tractor trailer slammed into a toll booth in Stratford killing seven people.  Because of this and other crashes, it's very strongly opposed toll roads come back into Connecticut.  The development of EZ-Pass helps, somewhat.

I was born having never seen a toll booth in Connecticut.  However, every trip to Boston involved the Mass Turnpike... a toll road.  New York has toll booths across the Hudson River to anywhere my family needed to go on the other side.  Tollbooth Jersey is well... Tollbooth Jersey.  Carlin said it best, you can't back out of your driveway without a man in a green hat wanting fifty cents.  Every state around us has tolls, and venturing to those places means those annoying booths.

My suggestion for Connecticut: toll I-95 and I-84 at both state lines, I-395 between Exits 89 and 90, CT 2A before the Mohegan Sun exit.  Let the out of state drivers pay for using our roads, while not burdening so much our own drivers.

[TennBear]

The interesting thing about toll roads is that it makes the people that are using a service pay for the service provided. Most roads have a significant protion of their costs paid for by the Federal Government. It is interesting that the states that have the highest state taxes tend to be the one's that actually charge for road usage. Taxed heavily for services and then charged to use the services that weere funded. Then there is Delaware that basically uses the tolls from I95 to fund it's entire Highway Department. I am for toll roads in areas where the states would not have been able to put them in otherwise, if there is a need. That need could be because of traffic or to facilitate business growth or multiple other reasons. I feel that the roads should convert to non-toll once the roads are paid for. I can understand mantaining a toll to pay the costs of continued mantainance. Then there is the Pennsylvania Turnpike. First toll road ever built, paid for years ago, and always in the worst of physical condition.

[moonshield]

The feds should make all new highway expansions HOT (High Occupancy Toll). That would encourage more people to drive together, raise revenues, and the road would certainly be used all of the time (unlike HOV). The cost per passenger-mile on HOT is far lower than any other mode of transportation.

Edited by moonshield, 01 April 2007 - 07:26 AM.

[seicer]

FromCityToRural, on Mar 28 2007, 04:54 PM, said:

to date, I haven't seen anyone on Loop 49.

Or, in the case of Dallas, there's a toll highway that just opened up that heads North to Frisco. There's also a frontage road that's almost as fast - and is free. And yet, there were folks who drove on the toll road. Never ceases to amaze me.

That's funny, because Loop 49 and all of the toll roads (with the exception of the Camino Tolled Facility) generate profit and have shown to carry an adequate AADT volume -- or else, the other phases would not be constructed or extended.

As for the frontage roads, development will quickly catch up to the frontage roads and will become as congested as this. Would you still avoid driving on the toll road (at speeds of 70-80 MPH) so you can drive on the congested frontage road (35 MPH with traffic signals)?

[FromCityToRural]

Yes, I would avoid driving on the faster toll road, out of principal. Especially in states that have a state income tax (Texas doesn't, yet still keeps fantastic roads), there's no reason I should pay to drive on a road I paid taxes to build.

And I'm not sure where the profit's coming from. I really never have seen anyone on 49...the other thing that irks me is that they decided to toll it with only the bare minimum of public participation to satisfy the law. The first draft of 49 IIRC was a free, 2-lane undivided road, and as it's being built now it's a 4-lane, divided, limited access road. They had already previously planned to toll the road when they put on the sham "public participation" meetings, and there was no changing their mind. They tried to pitch it as a good idea, since it would get done faster...except it will travel 3/4 mile from my house, so nobody in the area WANTS it done sooner. It'll also block off the road I take to school while they build, making a 30-minute commute closer to 45 minutes or more. The folks who got the mic at the meeting were SO glowing about the road that it made me wonder if they were planted there...nobody I have talked to personally has anything good to say about 49. And all the while, the free road will still be just as fast getting to Dallas. Go figure.

It's gotten to a point where between 49 and the subdivisions popping up, we have become open to selling our house and moving again.

Edited by FromCityToRural, 04 April 2007 - 01:04 PM.

[cloudship]

But apparently you didn't pay enough.

I understand the idea of not wanting to pay more - who does. But I also understand teh reality that all this costs money. One way or another we are going to pay for it - whether taxes up front, tolls at the point of service, or simply by not having as good a product or service.

[FromCityToRural]

I don't know...maybe it just has to do with the fact that we never had toll roads where I grew up, so I'm just not used to the idea. I've been over toll bridges a few times, but never in my life on a turnpike or equivalent. I suppose that instilled in me the idea that roads are supposed to be free to use.

But when you say "One way or another we are going to pay for it - whether taxes up front, tolls at the point of service, or simply by not having as good a product or service." - we have fantstic roads here, without state income tax, and mostly without tolls, and California, conversely, has a perversely high tax rate and some of the worst roads I've ever driven on.What am I missing here?

Edited by FromCityToRural, 04 April 2007 - 01:10 PM.

[seicer]

^ California also has its own problems. Funding for maintenance was quite low for many years as the state focused its monies on completing highway projects throughout the state, especially in the metro areas. Interstate 105, for instance, was extremely expensive to build as it is a viaduct over developed ground. Seismic retrofitting projects and HOV-lane additions are also very expensive. For those reasons alone, most new limited-access expressways constructed in California today are tolled, and expansions, such as HOV-lanes, are tolled.

Per "I really never have seen anyone on 49" -- that is an opinionated statement. Obviously the toll road has a decent amount of AADT, otherwise the operators could not turn a profit. Toll roads have been in the United States since the 1700s beginning with the turnpikes, and are an efficient and proven way to pay for a highway project -- when the proper studies have been conducted.

Take for example the New Jersey Turnpike. It is a highly efficient thoroughfare throughout the state of New Jersey, and pays for itself through the toll booths that are at every interchange and at its terminus's. There are many well developed service areas, and the pavement is in great condition. Compare this to NJDOT, who is running in the red on its highway projects and cannot afford to expand or construct any new highways. It also has next to nothing in terms of rest areas, and those that do exist are merely pull-offs with trash barrels. There are now discussions of tolling existing highways because of the huge shortfall in money due to exorbitant maintenance expenses brought on by an aging infrastructure.

Or let's take Kentucky. It had numerous toll roads but as they were paid off, the tolls were lifted -- with the exception of a few, especially those decommissioned in the past three-four years (e.g. Daniel Boone), where state monies were used to lift the tolls due to a low AADT. The parkways in Kentucky were built through very rural areas with little to no development along their entire lengths.

[FromCityToRural]

Opinionated? No...observed. Perhaps the traffic just isn't on the section I see, but to say that my own eyes are lying...don't think so!

California...yes, it has problems galore, that's for sure. It's why we moved! Very inefficient government, high taxes with little return for taxpayers' investment.

BTW, what's AADT? I'm not familiar with the term...

[seicer]

Sorry, annual average daily traffic. I should say vehicles-per-day (VPD) since the toll roads keep records on the amount of entries to their tolled system daily.

[traal]

blueblackcat, on Mar 2 2007, 02:00 PM, said:

Yet another reason why toll roads are bad is because of the unhealthy fiscal conditions that usually make them "seem" like a good idea.

I don't see why that makes toll roads bad.

Quote

Legislators who are under immense pressure to keep taxes low by subsidizing them with toll revenues...

Toll revenues shouldn't subsidize taxes, they should desubsidize road construction and maintenance.

[Alabadrock]

I'm all for toll roads.  If it improves my travel, I'm fine with paying.  Plus, having to deal with ALDOT (Alabama Department of Transportation), it seems like toll roads are going to be the way of the future, cause ALDOT does not seem to want to do anything in the form of transportation.