5)  Why didn't they make I-70 the turnpike, instead?

 

THE HELL YOU SAY!!  Keep those tolls up north!!!

Didn't the Turnpike pre-date the Interstate Highway System?  Most early superhighways, starting with the Penna. Pike, charged tolls to cover their costs.  That is, until Eisenhower decided to start federally subsidizing the American Dream in 1956.

 

 

 

 

The Ohio Turnpike (along with most of the midwest/east coast tollroads) predate the Interstate system (in the case of the Ohio Turnpike by just a couple of years).

According to the records of the Ohio Turnpike Commission (which can be found at the state library and OSU [somewhere, due to Thompson's renovation]), the commission looked at 5 different allignments between 1948 (commision's chartering) and 1952 (construction started)...

The current Ohio Turnpike

Following US 30

Following US 40 (now I-70)

Following US 25 (now I-75)

Following present day I-71

 

Only two routes got serious consideration, the current turnpike route and the "I-71" route.

As construction was wraping up on "project 1" in 1954, The OTC had started planning for a Cincy, Dayton, (suburban) Columbus, (suburban) Cleveland, Conneaut route

http://www.roadfan.com/1954map.jpg

 

 

As for Eisenhower starting federal subsidizing the American Dream, he (actually congress) was just expanding a system that been in planning since the Great Depression, http://www.roadfan.com/intreg.html.

 

And least you forget, federal subsidizing for highway projects go as far back as our country's founding.  US 40 has been federally subsidized since 1803!  The feds just couldn't give land away for roads like they could for railroads back in the 19th Century.  :-P

According to the Organization of American Historians, land grants were provided in aid of 18,738 miles of railroad routes. At their peak in 1916 (after the land grants had ended by 1900), the railroads had built 254,000 route miles.

 

What percent of the total route mileage was aided by land grants?

Pa. Turnpike for sale or rent

By Larry King

INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

 

Gov. Rendell officially put the Pennsylvania Turnpike up for sale or lease this morning.

 

Private operators, some of whom have been checking into the turnpike for nearly a year, have until Dec. 22 to submit their proposals, Rendell said at a news conference.

 

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/16177319.htm

Under public ownership, toll roads are revenue neutral.  They cover their costs.  The only way for a private consortium to make money is to RAISE TOLLS (and eliminate personnel, and/or reduce pay/benefits). 

 

Now, they are forcing people to install transponders in their cars  and doing dumb things like blocking the emergency turnarounds. 

 

With privatization, there is absolutely no way around raising tolls.  Why not just cut out the middle man, raise the tolls, and have the legislature earmark the excess money for transportation projects?  In the end, it's the same difference from a financial perspective. 

 

I'm for turning every mile of freeway in the country into publicly owned toll roads, but not turning them over to a corporation for private profiteering.

 

 

I think others are going to learn from Indiana's mistakes. I agree with you that privatization might not be such a good idea and that it might be better to use Ohio Turnpike revenues for other purposes, such as rebuilding the Ft. Wayne to allevaite freight rail congestion. I'd favor converting all interstate-type roads into toll roads, under state ownership and, again, using the proceeds for revitalization of public transportation.

The only problem I can forsee with conversion of Interstates to toll roads would be the actual conversion itself: the entrance ramps were not set up to accomodate toll booths or the lines of traffic that typically back up at them, especially in an urban setting.  This would require more land acquisition and lane construction (and more $$$$$). 

 

One way around it, however, would be to go with an E-Z Pass type of system where you just drive past a sensor that automatically asesses the toll and you just keep driving. That would also allow a pre-pay system for frequent users.

 

I grew up in New England where I-95 was a toll road from New York to New Haven (they called it the Connecticut Turnpike, and it is no longer a toll road). The Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine turnpikes still exist and they use variations of the E-Z Pass systems, as does the New York State Thruway and New Jersey Turnpike (I believe).  Doesn't do much for traffic congestion, but everyone does pay their way for the privilege.

 

Although I agree with the concept of "pay as you go", I think you'd get major pushback on this from trucking companies and groups like the AAA.

I think others are going to learn from Indiana's mistakes. I agree with you that privatization might not be such a good idea and that it might be better to use Ohio Turnpike revenues for other purposes, such as rebuilding the Ft. Wayne to allevaite freight rail congestion. I'd favor converting all interstate-type roads into toll roads, under state ownership and, again, using the proceeds for revitalization of public transportation.}

 

This is pretty much how France pays for SNCF, including all those wonderful TGV lines.

 

The Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine turnpikes still exist and they use variations of the E-Z Pass systems, as does the New York State Thruway and New Jersey Turnpike (I believe).  Doesn't do much for traffic congestion, but everyone does pay their way for the privilege.

 

No, but E-Z Pass does a TON for congestion at toll plazas.  Other states that have adopted E-Z Pass are Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and now Virginia.  It's nice to be able to sail through the toll plaza while everyone else has to wait in an interminable line--especially trying to cross the Chesapeake Bay Bridge on a summer weekend!

 

If Virginia proceeds with their plan of making I-95 and a portion of the Capital Beltway into High Occupancy Toll roads, E-Z Pass is going to be the sole collection technology used. 

 

Very cool to know EZ-Pass is having such a positive impact.  It's been a while since I've been back East.  Thanks for the update!

Although I agree with the concept of "pay as you go", I think you'd get major pushback on this from trucking companies and groups like the AAA.

 

If the highway trust funds goes bankrupt in 2008 or 2009 as is forecast, and if our elected officials fail to come up with other revenue "enhancements" or cost savings, tolls may be easier for the truckers and AAA to take. The alternative is ever-worsening road congestion, decaying pavement and more bridges that are considered deficient. In fact, increased use of tolls are on table....

 

http://www.surfacecommission.gov/commissionlinks.htm

Why is the highway trust fund going bankrupt?  I thought it was continuously funded with federal gasoline/diesel taxes.  Or, has the fund been over-leveraged through bonding or something like that?

 

 

There many factors involved. But the key problems are dramatically rising costs of highway maintenance and construction due to more expensive types of highway projects being sought today, sudden and recent increases in steel and fuel prices, and inflation-induced cost increases over the years. Further, federal gas taxes haven't been raised since the early 1990s, and traffic volumes/gas tax revenues aren't increasing as fast as they did in the 1960s-1980s, thus revenues aren't keeping up with the rising costs.

 

An underlying, but very important issue is that there is a diminishing return on highway capacity enhancements. The initial construction of a highway creates the greatest return on investment (especially if there is no other parallel interstate highway nearby, such as what happened in the 1950s and 1960s). Traffic volumes were greatly increased and so were the gas tax revenues.

 

The next stage of capacity expansion often resulted in paving a highway's median, such as what was done on I-77 in Cleveland from I-480 north to I-490. But there was a diminishing return on that. When I-77 was built, the right of way went from 0 to 4 lanes. When the median was filled in, I-77 went from 4 lanes to 6 -- a diminished return, but the only inexpensive way to add capacity (by paving the median).

 

To add more lanes means going outside the right of way, and that's what had to be done at the north end of I-77. It typically means lots of property acquisitions, building demolitions, earthmoving, bridge work, retaining walls, etc. And these are usually happening in urban areas, where land is more expensive. So not only is the return on investment diminished even further from earlier capacity additions, but the cost tends to be far greater.

 

The result is that the growth in traffic volume slows, as do gas tax revenues from it, compared to past years. Yet highway construction and maintenance costs are growing faster than in the past. And that's not even taking into account rising steel and fuel prices.

So much for the "roll back".......

 

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061218/DEVELOPINGNEWS/312180005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published December 18, 2006

 

Ohio Turnpike tolls to increase Jan. 1

 

BLADE STAFF

 

 

Tolls on the Ohio Turnpike will rise on Jan. 1 by an average of 13.5 percent for passenger vehicles and 7.8 percent for loaded trucks.

 

The Ohio Turnpike Commission today approved a new fare

 

 

MotherJones.com / News / Feature

 

The Highwaymen

Why you could soon be paying Wall Street investors, Australian bankers, and Spanish builders for the privilege of driving on American roads.

 

Daniel Schulman with James Ridgeway

January 01 , 2007

 

"the road is one succession of dust, ruts, pits, and holes." So wrote Dwight D. Eisenhower, then a young lieutenant colonel, in November 1919, after heading out on a cross-country trip with a convoy of Army vehicles in order to test the viability of the nation's highways in case of a military emergency. To this description of one major road across the west, Eisenhower added reports of impassable mud, unstable sand, and wooden bridges that cracked beneath the weight of the trucks. In Illinois, the convoy "started on dirt roads, and practically no more pavement was encountered until reaching California."

 

It took 62 days for the trucks to make the trip from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco, and another 37 years for Ike to complete a quest, inspired by this youthful journey and by his World War II observations of Germany's autobahns, to build a national road system for the United States. In 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act, which called for the federal and state governments to build 41,000 miles of high-quality roads across the nation, over rivers and gorges, swamps and deserts, over and through vast mountain ranges, in what would later be called the "greatest public works project in human history." So vital to the public interest did Eisenhower, an old-style fiscal conservative, consider the interstate highway system, he even authorized the federal government to assume 90 percent of the massive cost.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/01/highwaymen.html

 

^interesting book.

I know one of the authors (Jim Ridgeway -- we researched some mob stories in the late 90s), and he tends to be a bit sensational. But he's good at going to the heart of an issue. He and the other writers did a good job researching this story.

 

By the way, we wouldn't have a captive market -- whether the road was in public or private hands -- if we had surface transportation alternatives to the interstate highway system. No matter who owns it, the interstate still has a monopoly-share of the travel market. The nation is held hostage to the health of the highway system and the flow of cheap oil. Privatization is only one of the developments in recent years that has exposed the dangerous eggs-in-one-basket path we have taken in the past 50 years.

 

    I would be interested in learning more about this highway trust fund and what the projections are.

See some of the information linked at:

 

http://www.surfacecommission.gov/commissionlinks.htm

I don't like these privatization deals where the public ends up getting the short end of the stick.  I think the Indiana deal was structured to benefit the private consortium much more so than the state of Indiana. 

 

I had a random thought, though I admit, I haven't fully thought it through to determine how sound it really is:

 

Given what's coming with peak oil and the fact that as oil becomes more and more expensive (and scarce) in the coming decades, and since there is no combination of alternative fuels that will allow us to keep driving at the levels we do in America, then maybe it's not so bad for states to cash out their toll road assets now, provided the deal is overall better than the one in Indiand AND the money used for alternatives to driving (which the state of Indiana did not do, obviously). 

That's been my thought as well. I even wrote a report about it a year ago.

Can you send me a copy of that report?  Or post it here?

 

 

Here's my report (I have another version with lots of graphics and such, but it also lists an organization's name as the sponsor of the report -- but the organization refused to sponsor it. So, it's just 8 pages of jottings now.):

 

http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/Turnpike_Lease_PP.pdf

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061230/NEWS11/612300397/-1/NEWS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published December 30, 2006

 

Drivers gripe at pike toll hike

Those who stay with roadway will dig deeper on Monday

 

By DAVID PATCH

BLADE STAFF WRITER

 

 

Count Valdon Myers among truck drivers who will be using the Ohio Turnpike as little as possible after toll rates go up Monday morning - but then again, he doesn't drive the toll road very much as it is.

 

 

......

Everybody wants something for nothing.  The tolls pay for maintenance and the price of asphalt is going up with the price of oil.  What do they expect?

 

Of course, if they had built the toll road to European standards (or re-built it when they added the third lane), it would require less maintenance over the long run.

 

 

b]A turnpike paved with [glow=red,2,300]gold[/glow]? [/b]

Monday, January 01, 2007

An increasing number of states are raising large sums for in frastructure by leasing or selling their turnpikes to private operators.

 

.......

 

It's an idea Strickland shouldn't summarily dismiss.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/editorials/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1167643840234000.xml&coll=2

Don't want to rush things.  IIRC, that toll way lease helped kill the Republicans at the ballot box November 7.  Personally, I would describe it as another libertarian fantasy.

How do explain Chicago's leasing of the Skyway? I know they had a fiscal crunch, but there's a million ways to skin a cat.

 

Even more ironically, there are Democrats in the Illinois state assembly sponsoring legislation to lease toll roads in other parts of the state and use the proceeds to pay for transportation improvements, including expanded, higher-speed passenger train services.

The only way leasing the turnpike to work is if tolls go up.  Why not just cut out the middleman, keep the turnpike in private hands, raise the tolls and use the excess for non-automotive transportation (i.e. Ohio Hub, public transit, etc)?

 

 

^^^Not to mention the stupidity of getting a one-time cash windfall while tying up a public resource in an extremely long lease.  It's like taking out a home equity loan to pay for steak dinner every night. 

If lease revenues were used to pay off debts or operating expenses, then yes, that would be a fair analogy. But if the lease revenues are used to increase the state's capacity for job creation and additional tax revenues, then your analogy doesn't work.

I have full confidence in the State of Ohio to piss away all the money.  Call me a cynic, but as it stands now, the state government just sees a cash cow.  Now, if they actually define a *need* for this money, e.g. to construct the Ohio Hub Plan, that would be different. 

 

Seeing some of idiot Blackwell's ideas for spending this money, though, I'm convinced there aren't too many fiscally bright people running around Columbus.

Fortunately, Blackwell isn't the one being inaugurated on Monday.  Strickland has so far opposed privatizing the turnpike.  We'll see if he changes his mind.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070112/OPINION03/701120343/-1/OPINION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published January 12, 2007

 

The people of Ohio own the turnpike

 

 

In view of Jim Seney's Jan. 6 Saturday Essay regarding the cashing out of the Ohio Turnpike, I reiterate my opposition to selling or leasing our Ohio Turnpike to outside interests.

 

The turnpike is an important segment of U.S. Interstate 80-90 and rightfully belongs to those who paid for it - the people of Ohio and the United States. First designated as U.S. 80-90 by the Congress as part of our national defense highway system, the turnpike has been paid for by the public many times over.

 

More at link above:

PennDOT would profit from making I-80 toll road, turnpike officials say

Friday, January 12, 2007

 

By Joe Grata, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission would like to expand toll collection to interstates, starting with Interstate 80 which runs across the state.

 

The commission would use its experience and resources to act as an agent for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, turning over the profits to PennDOT to use for growing bridge and highway needs.

 

.......

 

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07012/753244-147.stm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

(Joe Grata can be reached at [email protected] or 412-263-1985.)

 

I have no problem with making I-80 a public toll road, or any other stretch of interstate where it's feasible.  I have a problem with privatizing, however.  All that does is contract out the political will to raise tolls.  Why should we enrich yet another multi-national corporation when we could use the money for other transportation needs? 

So if you won the lottery, would you take the lump sum, or the annual payouts?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  Contact: Tiffany Wlazlowski

 

          Feb. 9, 2007 (703) 838-1717

 

 

 

    Highway Users Form Coalition to Oppose Privatization of Toll Roads

    Group Says Government Must Be Held Accountable for Financing      

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The American Trucking Associations, in conjunction with the American Automobile Association, the American Highway Users Alliance, the National Association of Truck Stop Operators, the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association today announced the formation of a coalition of highway user groups to combat the growing trend toward the privatization or leasing of existing toll facilities to private investors.

 

    Known as "Americans for a Strong National Highway Network," the coalition is designed to advance the rights of American motorists to travel on safe, reliable public roads; maintain a robust national highway network for the efficient transport of goods and the military; and to hold government accountable for ensuring financing is transparent, motivated by public good and dedicated to transportation purposes.

 

    The announcement was made at a press conference held at the National Press Club.

 

    "The sale or lease of existing toll facilities generates revenue at great expense to taxpayers and the trucking industry and carries potential negative impacts on highway safety, security and the motoring public," said ATA President and CEO Bill Graves. "We must consider the long-term impact privatization will have on our nation's transportation system and explore all available financing options to ensure that the government is motivated by public good and transportation purposes."

 

    Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, stated: "For the Bush Administration, the rush to promote public-private partnerships is based in ideology, not a critical evaluation of how public-private partnerships might help meet the goal of an improved, integrated national transportation system and further the public interest."

 

    ATA strongly opposes the lease or sale of existing toll roads, bridges or tunnels to private parties and has called upon the government to abandon these financing techniques.

 

    The trucking industry supports the objective of a toll-free national highway system where funds to finance highway improvements primarily come from highway user fees, such as the fuel tax.

 

   

    The American Trucking Associations is the largest national trade association for the trucking industry. Through a federation of other trucking groups, industry-related conferences, and its 50 affiliated state trucking associations, ATA represents more than 37,000 members covering every type of motor carrier in the United States.

 

###

Governor opposed to ideas to privatize lottery , turnpike

Columbus Dispatch

 

Although Gov. Ted Strickland supports trying to leverage money that the state receives from its settlement with tobacco companies to generate additional cash, he remains opposed to such proposals as leasing the Ohio Turnpike and selling the Ohio Lottery.

 

........

 

http://dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2007/02/13/20070213-D3-00.html

March 25, 2007

 

Daniels abandons Indy-area toll road

Decision follows fierce criticism, raises questions on I-69 project

By Mary Beth Schneider

[email protected]

March 25, 2007

 

 

In the face of blistering public opposition, Gov. Mitch Daniels on Saturday dropped his controversial proposal to build a toll road bypass east and south of Indianapolis.

 

He also drastically scaled back plans for a similar project in Northwestern Indiana

..........

 

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070325/LOCAL19/703250428/1195/LOCAL18

 

i'd be in favor of selling the turnpike as long as all the proceeds would go to developing an extensive passenger rail system in ohio. thats the only way i'd support it.

 

 

Wiki-knowledge can say it better than I can: "E-ZPass is the electronic toll collection system used on most toll bridges and toll roads in the northeastern United States from Virginia to Maine, and recently extended into Illinois. All states use the same technology, allowing travelers to use the same E-ZPass tag throughout the network. Various independent systems that use the same technology have since been integrated into the E-ZPass system. These include Fast Lane in Massachusetts, Smart Tag in Virginia, and most recently I-Pass in Illinois."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Z_Pass

 

Currently the Ohio Turnpike... along with the Indiana Turnpike... represents a big gap in the E-Z Pass system linking the Northeast to Illinois.  E-Z Pass

 

 

It would seem to make sense, but does it really matter if there is a connected network of EZ Pass turnpike system?  I have never driven on the Ohio Turnpike, but I just don't see where the need is to have a seamless network.

 

What-ev  :|

i use the ohio turnpike on average 20 times per for the last 7 years.

 

please dear god, ODOT, implement EZ pass.

Since when is Illinois the size of West Virginia?!?!

well and what happened to the western part of Virginia??

Since when is Illinois the size of West Virginia?!?!

 

LOL!!!

The real question should be, when will Pennsylvania actually do something constuctive with the toll dollars collected on the Pa. Turnpike?

 

My guess, after driving the Pa Turnpike from the Ohio state line to Breezewood over the past 15 years, is "no".

We'll get EZ Pass when I-70, 71, 90, and 77 become toll roads.  Looking at the state of the Highway Trust...that may not be too long.

We'll get EZ Pass when I-70, 71, 90, and 77 become toll roads.  Looking at the state of the Highway Trust...that may not be too long.

 

Fine by my standards, on average I use a freeway less than once a month.