Why are so many rest stops closed?

[holstein13]

I'm heading west from NC on my way to Los Angeles along I-40. I've noticed that about 30% of the rest stops are closed. Why is that? Is it because of budget cuts, restoration, abuses by travelers?

It can be a real hardship when there are so few rest stops to begin with and then you find the one you need is closed and the next one isn't for another 100 miles or more.

It's particularly disruptive to me because I'm traveling solo on this trip and I don't have a navigator or travel planner working while I'm driving. The other day, I wanted to camp in Little Rock and had planned to reserve my campsite at the last rest stop before entering Little Rock. When I got there, the rest stop was closed. Now I was in a pickle. I had to find an exit and pull over at the side of the road to figure things out.

ON EDIT: Please do not mention politics in your responses. If you think they are closed because of budget considerations, you can say that, just don't blame a political party or politics, etc. Let's try and stick with the facts without politics. I fear the thread will get shut down prematurely otherwise.

[holstein13]

Strabo wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Closed..........for all the reasons mentioned

As for 'planning'

You're in a 'self-contained RV'

Pull over at an exit/side road/wide spot.......and then use your facilities as needed.

5 yrs of FTng with a dog and a GF with small bladder.
You just pull over where safe.
Having spent 30+ yrs in CA-never counted on an Open Rest Area. Few and far.

Lol, exactly what I was thinking. I'd park on the side of the road anywhere and....Rest, you don't need a designated area to do it.

It's really not that simple. I was able to find an exit to pull over to the side and use my bathroom, but sometimes you'll get off at an exit and find it has no entrance back on the freeway or you need to do a U turn to get back on track, or there are no good turnarounds for miles.

I happen to have an easily accessible bathroom to use, but what about those with trailers and 5th wheels where the slides block the bathroom?

[wa8yxm]

mlts22 wrote:
I think long term the best solution might be a public/private partnership. In return for letting people park and crash out for a while, a business that puts a chunk of its property would be compensated. Of course, there would need to be a lot of fine tuning of rules due to abuse by the public, businesses, and government overreach, but this might be the best way to do things, especially in areas of the US where the Federal government doesn't own much land.

Short story: Feb (I think) 2006 Drove right into a bilzzard, In Utah, pulled into a "Cooporative Rest Area" Parked, got perhaps 10-20 yards from RV realized I'd forgetten something turned around to go back and my footprints were already filled in kind of blizzard.

Spent the night Next AM continued on clear plowed roads noticing all the cars in the ditch who did not have the brains to pull off before they skidded off.

I'm not sore how Utah does it, but it was a Cooperative rest area. A fast or quick food store, gas staion and lots and lots of parking.

Might want to check with them for suggestions on how to impliment such a system.

Question: I know the first Roasdside "Stops" were nothing more than limited parking, pit toilets and a picnic table or two. Where was the first "Roadside Park" as those are called now days.

(If you need a hint, I'm from Michigan, which has been a leader in transporation for a long long time, though this was about as far as you can get from Detroit and still be in MI.)

[down_home]

I wouldn't know since I was involved, in trying, to stop the rascals two times.

[NYCgrrl]

subcamper wrote:
When it comes to budget cuts, politicians usually chop the stuff that produces the least repercussions from the voters (as in not getting re-elected!). Since rest stops are often used by travelers from out of state, the actual number of people that would be angry about the rest stop closures and could do something about it is small.

Steve

That quite possibly is the way AZ laww makers thought in 2010 but it didn't work out that way at all:

The New York Times wrote:
The people of Arizona kept their upper lips stiff when officials mortgaged off the state’s executive office tower and a “Daily Show” crew rolled into town to chronicle the transaction in mocking tones. They remained calm as lawmakers pondered privatizing death row.

But then the state took away their toilets, and residents began to revolt.

“Why don’t they charge a quarter or something?’” said Connie Lucas, who lives in Pine, Ariz., about a two-and-a-half-hour drive from here. “There was one rest stop between here and Phoenix, and we really needed it.”

Arizona has the largest budget gap in the country when measured as a percentage of its overall budget, and the state Department of Transportation was $100 million in the red last fall when it decided to close 13 of the state’s 18 highway rest stops.

I believe they reopened several of the rest stops since then but some of them are seasonal.

[subcamper]

When it comes to budget cuts, politicians usually chop the stuff that produces the least repercussions from the voters (as in not getting re-elected!). Since rest stops are often used by travelers from out of state, the actual number of people that would be angry about the rest stop closures and could do something about it is small.

Steve

[mlts22]

I think long term the best solution might be a public/private partnership. In return for letting people park and crash out for a while, a business that puts a chunk of its property would be compensated. Of course, there would need to be a lot of fine tuning of rules due to abuse by the public, businesses, and government overreach, but this might be the best way to do things, especially in areas of the US where the Federal government doesn't own much land.

[jwmII]

Budget cuts are the reason many rest areas in Az. were closed. Many located in rural areas had permanent caretakers who lived on or near the site in state housing. Many that remained open though closed their RV dumps because the waste water treatment facilities at those rural locations were becoming overloaded and it was costing to much to treat the waste without adding more capacity. Contrary to popular belief those places are expensive to build, maintain and operate.

[ramgunner]

In Utah, a number closed because they were being used as "hookup" sites - mostly near built-up areas.

There are still some, but now the model is "public-private partnerships". A business has to have parking, and agree to stay open around the clock, and offer restrooms and water without requiring a purchase. If any of you saw the thread about the Scipio and Beaver Pilot Flying J's, you see how some will take advantage of this. http://rvgunner.com/scipiobeaverflyingj.htm

A list of all of them in Utah can be found at http://www.udot.utah.gov/public/mmqa/f?p=147:3:4504519754788::NO:20::

[valhalla360]

Dog Trainer wrote:
It seems to me that a way to increase rest areas and also save $$ is to create travel islands that service both sides of the interstate. They would have to be larger and better set up to accommodate the additional traffic. On the positive side there could be more of them servicing all while less of them per side. The money issue is real for most states and I do not see a major change no matter what political party. If we have a single rest area that services both sides we can lower our overall building costs as well as the cost to patrol and maintain them. We need to rethink how we do things to get the most of our State Dollars Special interest and entitlement eats away at every state budget.

Left side entrances and exits have much higher crash rates. This would be particularly bad for rest areas that have a high percentage of slow to brake/accelerate trucks.

If you are willing to allow commercial operations, one thing you see in Europe a lot is a compact rest area with building over the roadway shared by both sides. If you just want a bathroom break or eat in your rig, you can still do it but the commercial operations pay for the upkeep.

[Hammerhead]

The problem with rest areas in the median is that you have left lane exit and entrance ramps which can cause problems. North Dakota has one and even though traffic volume is very low, most people can't get up to the 75 MPH speed limit before they enter the fast lane.

[cbshoestring]

Dog Trainer wrote:
It seems to me that a way to increase rest areas and also save $$ is to create travel islands that service both sides of the interstate. They would have to be larger and better set up to accommodate the additional traffic. On the positive side there could be more of them servicing all while less of them per side. The money issue is real for most states and I do not see a major change no matter what political party. If we have a single rest area that services both sides we can lower our overall building costs as well as the cost to patrol and maintain them. We need to rethink how we do things to get the most of our State Dollars Special interest and entitlement eats away at every state budget.

Unless you have space between the road surfaces(I-90 in New York--plaza in the middle) then you have to build a bridge (I-76 PA, midway Plaza). Bridges cost more than buildings.

Now, I know someone is going to say that you eliminate 1/2 the people, 1/2 the maintenance, etc... May I remind you that those mutliple directional plazas need to be twice as big, with twice the service.

Of course I am just guessing :R

[Dog_Trainer]

It seems to me that a way to increase rest areas and also save $$ is to create travel islands that service both sides of the interstate. They would have to be larger and better set up to accommodate the additional traffic. On the positive side there could be more of them servicing all while less of them per side. The money issue is real for most states and I do not see a major change no matter what political party. If we have a single rest area that services both sides we can lower our overall building costs as well as the cost to patrol and maintain them. We need to rethink how we do things to get the most of our State Dollars Special interest and entitlement eats away at every state budget.

[cbshoestring]

Do an internet search for rest stop closures....Budget cuts will be the reason.

Although I happen to think the PA Turnpike shut down the picnic areas for OTHER reasons....

Several years ago they started to refurbish/rebuild all the service Plazas that are spaced every 40 miles or so. At that time, they also removed the numerous pull off areas---Most where just areas that you could pull over and rest a while---some had picnic tables and porta-potties. Since these area were mostly just parking spaces, with an area of grass that needs cut. Replaced by removing the parking area, and planting more grass that needs cut. One has to assume that removing these "pull -offs" forced people in to the newly renovated plazas.

OK, to be fair. Several also have been overcome with new residential properties. Removing these areas keeps the idling truck from being parked there all night. Even though I worry about people who build near a highway, then complain about the noise. The T/P has added numerous WALLS to mitigate the noise to please the complaining neighbors. HELLLLLLOOOOOOO...you built a house with the oldest highway in the US in your backyard. NOW, you want to complain about noise??????

[valhalla360]

Damdifino wrote:
I've come close to pulling off on the shoulder and peeing by the side of the road. Sleep is an issue, too. I'm not an actuary, but I have to wonder if just one accident involving fatalities wouldn't cost the state more than keeping a rest area open for a year.

Two issues:
- You can always pull into a truck stop or a walmart parking lot, so it's your choice to disobey the law not the lack or rest areas.
- As someone who does crash analysis, it would be almost impossible to tie that to lack or rest areas. The data just doesn't capture that kind of detail.