U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-17-2011, 11:06 AM
Status: "Send HIM back- to Queens!" (set 7 days ago)
 
Location: Eureka CA
8,306 posts, read 11,156,290 times
Reputation: 12656

Advertisements

Agree with 20 years, sometimes the trees get in the way. The first couple times I went to South Carolina I though it must be a really ugly state because they had planted all those trees to disguise it. THEN I got SMART and got OFF the interstate and discovered a wonderful place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2011, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Oxford, Ohio
901 posts, read 2,023,101 times
Reputation: 693
Please...if you guys can't give a serious response, then just stay out of this, okay? I was merely expressing a pet peeve (just like I'm sure the rest of you have your own pet peeves...not liking corn fields, subdivisions, etc.)

I like...no, I LOVE trees...and I think forests are wonderful places. I wish I lived in one. But that's not the point of my thread. It was merely to indicate my displeasure with being hypnotized by a canyon of trees while driving along an interstate. I'd prefer to look out to the side of the highway and see something....anything....that breaks up the monotony of the drive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
Forest is what naturally grows on undisturbed land in your climate. Trees are not cut and corn fields planted for the amusement of people driving on the roadways.
I never said it was done for the amusement of people. But when you look at satellite imagery of certain stretches of interstates, I find it hard to believe those nicely manicured lines of trees just sprung up on their own. That's why I was asking why DOT's would do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yrsinBranson View Post
Boredom is the main reason that my husband and I never travel the interstates. Even without the trees they are monumentally boring!!!!

Next time you are going someplace, take a state highway or something other than an interstate and you will see lots of interesting scenery!

20yrsinBranson
I'm going to be traveling through Branson in a couple of days, God willing! I'm looking forward to it, and yes I agree it's nice to take the state highways. I'm going to drive from Branson over to Eureka Springs, and I'm looking forward to the scenery in that area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Padgett2 View Post
I suspect that a lot of it has to do with it being private property and the owners don't want to see the cars passing on the highway.
A reasonable response. Thank you for not castigating me like some of the others who have responded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2011, 05:13 AM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,396 posts, read 21,967,727 times
Reputation: 33691
the reason that there seems to be many trees along some highways is that the trees were in the way, obviously they did not want to transport these trees great distances so they often just moved them far enough to accommodate the road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2011, 07:19 AM
 
4,998 posts, read 7,335,471 times
Reputation: 8008
uhhhhh because trees grow in the southern united states.

It's all forest, its not like the government is intentionally planting millions of trees along the interstate, its how the land looked before the interstate highway and the department of transportation cut out a tiny bit of it to build the highway and left the remaining trees around it...

what do u want them to do?? Tear downs millions of acres of trees along the highway so u can have something else to look at besides trees?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2011, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,127,458 times
Reputation: 3570
While working in Colorado a tourist said to me " Gee those mountains sure are beautiful but they get in the way of the view"


Highway beautification act.

Oct 22, 1965:
President Lyndon Johnson signs the Highway Beautification Act
Highway Beautification Act, which attempts to limit billboards and other forms of outdoor advertising, as well as with junkyards and other unsightly roadside messes, along America's interstate highways. The act also encouraged "scenic enhancement" by funding local efforts to clean up and landscape the green spaces on either side of the roadways. "This bill will enrich our spirits and restore a small measure of our national greatness," Johnson said at the bill's signing ceremony. "Beauty belongs to all the people. And so long as I am President, what has been divinely given to nature will not be taken recklessly away by man."

The purposes of the HBA are set forth in 23 U.S.C. 131(a): to protect the public investment in highways; to promote the safety and recreational value of public travel; and to preserve natural beauty.

Some witnesses...speculated that the States, if left to themselves in this matter, would engage in 'strip zoning' and thus zone large stretches of highways as industrial solely for the purpose of outdoor advertising. "The committee notes the qualifying clause quoted above 'which shall be consistent with the purpose of this section.' The purpose of this act is to preserve and develop the recreational and esthetic values of the interstate and primary highway systems, and it would be wholly inconsistent with this purpose for a State to engage in such strip zoning


President Lyndon B. Johnson's

Remarks at the Signing of the Highway Beautification Act of 1965

October 22, 1965

Secretary Gardner, distinguished Members of the leadership of the Congress and Members of the Congress, and all other lovers of beauty:
America likes to think of itself as a strong and stalwart and expanding Nation. It identifies itself gladly with the products of its own hands. We frequently point with pride and with confidence to the products of our great free enterprise system--management and labor.
These are and these should be a source of pride to every American. They are certainly the source of American strength. They are truly the fountainhead of American wealth. They are actually a part of America's soul.
But there is more to America than raw industrial might. And when you go through what I have gone through the last 2 weeks you constantly think of things like that. You no longer get your computers in and try to count your riches.
There is a part of America which was here long before we arrived, and will be here, if we preserve it, long after we depart: the forests and the flowers, the open prairies and the slope of the hills, the tall mountains, the granite, the limestone, the caliche, the unmarked trails, the winding little streams--well, this is the America that no amount of science or skill can ever recreate or actually ever duplicate.
This America is the source of America's greatness. It is another part of America's soul as well.
When I was growing up, the land itself was life. And when the day seemed particularly harsh and bitter, the land was always there just as nature had left it--wild, rugged, beautiful, and changing, always changing.
And really, how do you measure the excitement and the happiness that comes to a boy from the old swimming hole in the happy days of yore, when I used to lean above it; the old sycamore, the baiting of a hook that is tossed into the stream to catch a wily fish, or looking at a graceful deer that leaps with hardly a quiver over a rock fence that was put down by some settler a hundred years or more ago?
How do you really put a value on the view of the night that is caught in a boy's eyes while he is stretched out in the thick grass watching the million stars that we never see in these crowded cities, breathing the sounds of the night and the birds and the pure, fresh air while in his ears are the crickets and the wind?
Well, in recent years I think America has sadly neglected this part of America's national heritage. We have placed a wall of civilization between us and between the beauty of our land and of our countryside. In our eagerness to expand and to improve, we have relegated nature to a weekend role, and we have banished it from our daily lives.
Well, I think that we are a poorer Nation because of it, and it is something I am not proud of. And it is something I am going to do something about. Because as long as I am your President, by choice of your people, I do not choose to preside over the destiny of this country and to hide from view what God has gladly given it.
And that is why today there is a great deal of real joy within me, and within my family, as we meet here in this historic East Room to sign the Highway Beautification Act of 1965.
Now, this bill does more than control advertising and junkyards along the billions of dollars of highways that the people have built with their money--public money, not private money. It does more than give us the tools just to landscape some of those highways.
This bill will bring the wonders of nature back into our daily lives.
This bill will enrich our spirits and restore a small measure of our national greatness.
As I rode the George Washington Memorial Parkway back to the White House only yesterday afternoon, I saw nature at its purest. And I thought of the honor roll of names--a good many of you are sitting here in the front row today--that made this possible. And as I thought of you who had helped and stood up against private greed for public good, I looked at those dogwoods that had turned red, and the maple trees that were scarlet and gold. In a pattern of brown and yellow, God's finery was at its finest. And not one single foot of it was marred by a single, unsightly, man-made construction or obstruction--no advertising signs, no old, dilapidated trucks, no junkyards. Well, doctors could prescribe no better medicine for me, and that is what I said to my surgeon as we drove along.
This bill does not represent everything that we wanted. It does not represent what we need. It does not represent what the national interest requires. But it is a first step, and there will be other steps. For though we must crawl before we walk, we are going to walk.
I remember the fierce resolve of a man that I admired greatly, a great leader of a great people, Franklin D. Roosevelt. He fought a pitched battle in 1936 with private interests whose target was private gain. And I shall long remember the words that I believe he echoed at Madison Square Garden, when he declared to the Nation that the forces of selfishness had not only met their match, but these forces had met their master.
Well, I have not asked you to come here today to tell you that I have a desire to master anyone. But until the clock strikes the last hour of the time allotted to me as President by vote of all the people of this country, I will never turn away from the duty that my office demands or the vigilance that my oath of office requires.
And this administration has no desire to punish or to penalize any private industry, or any private company, or any group, or any organization of complex associations in this Nation. But we are not going to allow them to intrude their own specialized private objective on the larger public trust. Beauty belongs to all the people. And so long as I am President, what has been divinely given to nature will not be taken recklessly away by man.
This Congress is to be thanked for the bill that you have given us. I wish it could have been more, but I realize, too, that there are other views to be considered in our system of checks and balances.
The grandchildren of those of you in this country that may have mocked and ridiculed us today, someday will point with pride to the public servants who are here in this room, who cast their lot with the people.
And unless I miss my guess, history will remember on its honor roll those of you whom the camera brings into focus in this room today, who stood up and were counted when that roll was called that said we are going to preserve at least a part of what God gave us.
Thank you very much.
NOTE: The President spoke at 2:16 p.m. in the East Room at the White House. In his opening words he referred to John W. Gardner, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
As enacted, the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 is Public Law 89-285 (79 Stat. 1028).
On August 13, 1965, the White House made public a report to the President from the Secretary of the Interior announcing his order restricting outdoor advertising on public lands adjacent to highways.
The report stated, "I am pleased to report that I am issuing orders extending to 1,000 feet the minimum distance any billboards or advertising displays can be placed on public lands administered by this Department's Bureau of Land Management.
"The 1,000-foot minimum still permits us to bar any such signs, regardless of the distance, and is established for those acceptable signs that are not eyesores or do not otherwise impair the natural view by the public. The present restriction is 660 feet? (1 Weekly Comp. Pres. Docs., p. 91)
On November 4, 1965, the White House announced the first allocation of Federal funds to the States under the highway beautification program. The sum of $6 million was allocated for the control of junkyards and outdoor advertising, and $60 million was allocated for landscaping and scenic enhancement.
The release stated that funds would be expended under procedures of the cooperative Federal-State highway program. The States, which would initiate projects and supervise the work, would later be reimbursed for 75 percent of the costs of controlling outdoor advertising and junkyards and for 100 percent of the cost of landscaping work (1 Weekly Comp. Pres. Docs., p. 459).
Source: Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1965. Volume II, entry 576, pp. 1072-1075. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1966.

Last edited by snofarmer; 09-20-2011 at 09:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2011, 07:28 PM
 
Location: Portlandia "burbs"
10,234 posts, read 14,009,862 times
Reputation: 25890
i can understand the op's point of view. But I love riding along a stretch of palm tree-lined streets. Gives it an exotic look. And in specific places, like St. Charles in New Orleans, is lined with those gorgeous OLD oak trees.

Now, I LOVE traveling I-5 from Oregon through California because of the changing elements and landscapes. We pass from overly-dense forests to different forests, to soft rolling bare hills, to wide-open valley spaces (which I LOVE ~ I guess I'm a freak in that I don't find it boring), to the only part of the drive that I dislike intensely: Grapevine Hell. When we drive that far it's to go to Palm Springs, so we take 10 to phase into desert beauty.

Most people I know only like mountain camouflaged by dense trees, that everything else is ugly. Glad my traveling vision isn't that myopic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2011, 10:39 PM
 
7,099 posts, read 24,527,451 times
Reputation: 7302
This reminds me of a trip though North Dakota. Miles and miles and miles through corn fields. You couldn't see anything else. No trees, no mountains, no houses, nothing but green corn stalks. And close to the road too. The stalks were taller than the car was high. Talk about boredom. It was BOREDOM!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 08:50 AM
 
12,366 posts, read 18,463,797 times
Reputation: 19318
Quote:
Originally Posted by insightofitall View Post
Forgive me, but here is my gripe of the day. Why are so many interstate highways, particularly in the southern United States, lined with miles and miles of trees? It creates a sort of "canyon of trees" that gets quite monotonously boring after a while...and I might add, a bit hypnotic. Why do transportation departments do this? It's so annoying. You can't see anything as you're driving along...nothing to break up the view in front of you. I'd much rather be able to look off to the side of the highway and see something...even if it's just corn fields and farm houses.

Edit: Sorry about the typo in the thread title.
As simple as it sounds - the reason people are listing "because that's what grows there" is correct. The states ("transportation departments") only maintain (mow) a certain space on each side, then you see a fence and the trees. Past that fence is private or non-highway owned public land (i.e. BLM or other state/govt agencies). It's up to those owners and departments to maintain the rest. There is alot of land in the rural area that is not developed yet and it would be to expensive to maintain, or they purposely let it grow out to build up a visual and sound barrier to the highway.
Even in the develped areas (example - Atlanta's beltway) that has that tunnel of trees look, for visual and sound barriers, behind that short 10 foot belt that you cannot see past is a bustling urban area.

As a point of trivia in regards to hypnotic driving- I read somewhere that interstate highway designers purposely put subtle curves in some long flat stretches of highway to avoid a driver's highway hypnoticsm, in the thought that a curve here and there would break up the monotomy and thus allow safer more attentive driving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,127,458 times
Reputation: 3570


Is it true that every so often there has to be a curve in a section of Interstate, to help keep drivers from falling asleep?
Yes and no. Design standards don’t require curves to keep drivers from falling asleep, but that is one reason curves may be included.
Although design standards don’t require curves at specific distances in the alignment of an Interstate highway, curves are introduced for a variety of reasons. The reasons including taking advantage of the terrain along the route; avoiding obstacles or cultural development in the path; and, accommodating environmentally sensitive areas or mitigating impacts on them. A curvilinear alignment also reduces the boredom of driving along extremely long tangent sections (engineer speak for “straight roads”), keeping the driver alert.
Excessive curvature or poor combinations of curvature limit capacity, cause economic losses due to increased travel time and operating costs, and detract from a pleasing appearance. Alignments should be as direct as practical; and consistent with the topography, developed properties, and community values. A flowing line that conforms generally to the natural contours of the land is preferable to an alignment with long tangents slashing through the terrain. Construction scars can be kept to a minimum and natural slopes and growth can be preserved.
The alignment of a proposed highway should be determined by a detailed study of the area through which the road passes. The finished highway, road, or street should be an economical, pleasant, and safe facility on which to travel.



Eisenhower Interstate Highway System -Frequently Asked Questions




Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
As a point of trivia in regards to hypnotic driving- I read somewhere that interstate highway designers purposely put subtle curves in some long flat stretches of highway to avoid a driver's highway hypnoticsm, in the thought that a curve here and there would break up the monotomy and thus allow safer more attentive driving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2011, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,401,000 times
Reputation: 36095
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptimusPrime69 View Post
uhhhhh because trees grow in the southern united states.

It's all forest, its not like the government is intentionally planting millions of trees along the interstate, its how the land looked before the interstate highway and the department of transportation cut out a tiny bit of it to build the highway and left the remaining trees around it...
Not so. Most of the rich mixed forest in the southern states was cut, cleared for growing cotton, which was the worst thing you can grow, it quickly exhausts the soil, and now the only thing that will still grow there is pine plantations, which have all been planted in nice straight rows, with no other living things in there. No wildflowers, no birds, nothing but pine.

Go to Google maps, and start zooming in along the interstates in Mississippi. You'll see that a lot of the land is cleared, except for a line trees right alongside the highway.

Last edited by jtur88; 09-25-2011 at 10:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top