driving across the usa - the developments

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:30:05 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 03:45:15 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
"Mark Hewitt" wrote:

I-95 for one.
Where ?

The whole of it that goes through New Jersey is a toll road.
http://www.state.nj.us/turnpike/

The NJ Turnpike has always been a toll road.

And...?

And What ? The NJ Turnpike is not an Interstate Hwy.

Apparently parts are so designated.

Yes, and that portion (Fort Lee-Trenton) is use fee.



The turnpikes were always intended to be incorporated into the
Interstate system, or at least the parts that made sense for the
system. Of course, it was also intended that no Interstate have a
toll and tolls were originally supposed to be dropped.

In the west that is the case, with the exception of 2 or 3 bridges that
still maintain a fee.

So if your claim is based on the fact that the turnpikes and
thruways weren't built as part of the Interstate system it begs
the question of whether a previously built highway incorporated
into the system is properly an Interstate highway.

The NJ Turnpike was constructed about 1951, the same period as the
Interstate project. Perhaps it came down to existing right-of-ways. Do
you know if the Fed exercised eminent domain directly ?

I-95 seems to be a bit from the norm, they have created the I-95
Coalition (http://www.i95coalition.org/).

jay
Thu, Sep 25, 2003




************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

--

Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."

"Barbara Vaughan" wrote in message
...

No, part of I-95 from the Delaware River to about New Brunswick is not a
toll road. Actually, I-95 kind of disappears for a while, around
Pennington, NJ, to be substituted first by I-295 and then by US Route 1
(which is not entirely limited access) and then it reappears north of
New Brunswick, at which point it joins the NJ Turnpike and becomes a
toll road.

All I know is I followed the I-95 from Washignton DC and kept going and
didn't turn off until I reached the George Washington bridge.

Mark Hewitt wrote:
"Barbara Vaughan" wrote:
No, part of I-95 from the Delaware River to about New Brunswick is not a
toll road. Actually, I-95 kind of disappears for a while, around
Pennington, NJ, to be substituted first by I-295 and then by US Route 1
(which is not entirely limited access) and then it reappears north of New
Brunswick, at which point it joins the NJ Turnpike and becomes a toll
road.

All I know is I followed the I-95 from Washignton DC and kept going and
didn't turn off until I reached the George Washington bridge.

For a long stretch, I-95 runs on the Pennsylvania side of the border while
the NJ Turnpike runs parallel, a few miles apart, in New Jersey.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Site remodeled 10-Sept-2003: Hundreds of new photos, easier navigation.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:14:31 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:30:05 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 03:45:15 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
"Mark Hewitt" wrote:

I-95 for one.
Where ?

The whole of it that goes through New Jersey is a toll road.
http://www.state.nj.us/turnpike/

The NJ Turnpike has always been a toll road.

And...?

And What ? The NJ Turnpike is not an Interstate Hwy.

Apparently parts are so designated.

Yes, and that portion (Fort Lee-Trenton) is use fee.

The turnpikes were always intended to be incorporated into the
Interstate system, or at least the parts that made sense for the
system. Of course, it was also intended that no Interstate have a
toll and tolls were originally supposed to be dropped.

In the west that is the case, with the exception of 2 or 3 bridges that
still maintain a fee.

There were no tollroads west of Kansas and Oklahoma in the west
that I can recall.

So if your claim is based on the fact that the turnpikes and
thruways weren't built as part of the Interstate system it begs
the question of whether a previously built highway incorporated
into the system is properly an Interstate highway.

The NJ Turnpike was constructed about 1951, the same period as the
Interstate project. Perhaps it came down to existing right-of-ways. Do
you know if the Fed exercised eminent domain directly ?

The Interstate projects didn't begin until the latter-1950s. All
engineering and construction, as well as legal matters, were
handled by the states.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

In the west that is the case, with the exception of 2 or 3 bridges that
still maintain a fee.

There were no tollroads west of Kansas and Oklahoma in the west
that I can recall.

The only ones I know of is "the 17 mile drive," which is not an
Interstate and the Orange County corridor (a private commuter hwy) and
the National Park roads.

jay
Fri, Sep 26, 2003


--

Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:56:37 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

In the west that is the case, with the exception of 2 or 3 bridges that
still maintain a fee.

There were no tollroads west of Kansas and Oklahoma in the west
that I can recall.

The only ones I know of is "the 17 mile drive," which is not an
Interstate

I guess that it's technically a tollroad, although it's more in
the manner of an entrance fee to the area since locals don't have
to pay it.

and the Orange County corridor (a private commuter hwy)

That is, of course, very recent, and is a tollroad. But in the
context of the past tense being used regarding the inception of
the interstate highway system also not applicable.

and

the National Park roads.

Those are entrance fees, not tolls.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

the National Park roads.

Those are entrance fees, not tolls.

It is of course a fee. But it is charged, among others, as a per
vehicle charge. 1 vehicle =$20.00 is a stated rate.

jay
Fri, Sep 26, 2003


--

Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."

[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

In article , "Hiloman"
wrote:

"rob tyler" wrote in message
...

Plan B: leave car and FLY (on 24th) from New Orleans to El Paso -

El Paso gets my vote as the ugliest city in the States. I'm too lazy to
read you earlier threads, but why would anyone be interested in El Paso?


You've obviously never been to Butte, Montana!

--
Sean Elkins RKBA
Owenton, KY

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:01:14 -0700, Go Fig wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:

the National Park roads.

Those are entrance fees, not tolls.

It is of course a fee. But it is charged, among others, as a per
vehicle charge. 1 vehicle =$20.00 is a stated rate.

Parking is very much involved in that. In some cases you may even
get a freebie if you are not going to stop and just pass through.
I believe you can do this on Hwy 120 through Yosemeite, or used
to could.

Here it costs $5 to drive up into the Coronado National Forest to
Mt Lemmon, but only if you stop. If you are driving to the
privately owned small town of Summerhaven or to the privately
operated ski slope there is no charge, and you coulddo a non-stop
round trip without paying.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

"Sean Elkins" wrote in message
news:260920032245308547%

You've obviously never been to Butte, Montana!

No, I haven't. But I hear it's butte-ugly.