The Mass. Pike rest stops are about to get a makeover. Here's what readers want to see.
Advertisement
Here are some of the most popular topics and a sampling of reader comments:
Food choices
The most common reader response was seeking better and healthier food options. Suggestions for specific restaurants included Sweetgreen, Shake Shack, Tasty Burger, and Panera. Some people asked for more gluten-free, vegetarian, and vegan options.
Readers also asked for the rest stops to have a more local flavor with 'New England authenticity' and seasonal food items. 'Small local restaurants and businesses instead of fast food chains!!,' Boston reader Melissa Mazzeo wrote. 'It would be so nice to get a feel for the town/region at a rest stop, rather than it feeling like I could be anywhere in the country.'
'
'Gluten-free options!!! And perhaps ways to accommodate other dietary/food allergy concerns. How about some small, local restaurants? Good ice cream.'
Sharon Catto, Brookline
But several readers pointed out that the current chains, like McDonald's and Dunkin, provide quick and simple food choices for harried families with kids. 'Families especially, need to juggle the tastes of multiple people with limited time to peruse every menu,' wrote Jay Minkarah of Nashua. 'Reliability and predictably at rest stops is important.'
Advertisement
There were also a few out-there suggestions. 'On a lighter note, please bring back Howard Johnson's,' reader Bill Latimer from Plainfield wrote. 'Today, there's nothing like HoJo's all-you-can-eat fried chicken, hot and crispy on the outside and still frozen at the bone!'
And many readers want MassDOT to make sure food and gas prices are affordable.
Electric vehicle charging
The second most popular request was for more and better EV charging options. Currently, the Pike has two Tesla-only stations along with six relatively slow generic chargers. In its request for proposals, MassDOT required that the new manager
'
'More and more powerful EV chargers. And EV chargers that are under cover (people pumping gas don't have to stand in the rain).'
Patrick Gabridge, Northampton
'They should be well lit, with proper facilities nearby for people to use,' reader Jay Dobbie in Worcester wrote. 'We can't expect EVs to keep thriving if the state doesn't keep to their word [and] help with the infrastructure.'
Connecticut resident Sue Santos was worried about high prices at Applegreen's chargers. 'It would be nice if Tesla upgraded the software to allow non-Tesla cars to charge, currently they can't at most [rest stops] on the Pike,' she wrote. 'They perform better than the Applegreen units.'
Applegreen has three different design options for the plazas: one for coastal areas, one for the central part of the state, and one for the Berkshire hills. This rendering shows the concept for the coastal area.
Rendering by Upland Architects
Bathrooms, bathrooms, bathrooms
Readers also had many suggestions for the rest stops' restrooms, starting with offering more options for family bathrooms, nongender-specific bathrooms, and attended bathrooms. Some would like to see paper towels make a comeback. And cleanliness was cited as an issue by dozens of readers.
Advertisement
'
'All entrances should have handicap door openers, also known as automatic swing door openers or ADA door openers. Every time I have to stop at a rest stop, I'm amazed and frustrated at the lack of them. -- Also, handicap toilet stalls should be checked more frequently - too often, the only handicap stall is unusable.'
Anonymous
'A built in stool at a sink so that little kids can reach the sink/soap themselves is the easiest thing that I wish all public restrooms had,' Abigail Starr in Cambridge wrote. 'A stall that is family friendly would be AMAZING too. Like having a baby holder, a seat for a young child, a shelf to put a diaper bag, and if they really want to make it totally welcoming a small flush toilet in addition to the regular adult sized toilet.'
Applegreen in New York
Dozens of readers said they had experience with the newly built rest stops by Applegreen in New York, and most were not happy about the facilities.
'Look at NY Thruway renovations and do the opposite,' John Mungovan of Harwich Port wrote, citing an inadequate number of bathrooms and crowded eating spaces.
Kathy Chelini of Milford said she has been
driving back and forth to Rochester, N.Y., for more than 40 years and does not like the new rest stops. 'Few places to sit and eat and we have to eat in the car,' she wrote. 'Too few bathrooms, too few gas pumps, long lines. Poor choice of food restaurants that close on Sunday and few vegetarian options.'
'
'THE NY THRUWAY STOPS ARE HORRIBLE.'
Harriet Luppino, Newton, MA
The controversy around Chick-fil-A on the Thruway was also mentioned by Globe readers. In New York, some have complained that the chain's decision to close on Sundays makes it a bad choice for a highway rest stop used seven days a week. In its request for proposals, MassDOT
Including Chick-fil-A is 'very impractical for a rest area restaurant to be closed on a Sunday, making everything else overcrowded and slow,' wrote Christina Paradiso from Princeton.
Advertisement
Assorted other ideas
Other suggestions including adding compost bins for leftover food, cushy chairs for weary travelers, and playground equipment for kids.
About a dozen readers asked for a fenced-in dog walk or other pet-oriented features. 'I'd love to see designated dog walk areas with disposal bags and containers,' wrote Linda Barbadoro of Sturbridge.
But perhaps the best suggestion came from the Rev. Laura Everett of Jamaica Plain, who said she appreciated that New Jersey has named its rest stops for famous state residents.
'Driving back from Cape May to Boston recently I stopped at Jon Bon Jovi, Judy Blume, Whitney Houston & James Gandolfini,' Everett wrote. 'Imagine how much more fun (and educational) our Massachusetts rest stops would be if we got to stop at the Amy Poehler Service Plaza or the
Aaron Pressman can be reached at
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Global Partners objects to Applegreen's Massachusetts project win
This story was originally published on C-Store Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily C-Store Dive newsletter. Last week, Applegreen received approval to rebuild and operate 18 travel plazas along major Massachusetts roads, including the state's main Turnpike, as part of the 35-year lease agreement with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The MDT approved Applegreen's pitch to take over the plazas over the course of two meetings on June 11 and 18. In the first of those, Scott Bosworth, chief of transit with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, said that the MDT chose Applegreen's proposal over those from several other notable convenience retailers, including Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores, 7-Eleven, RaceTrac and Energy North Group, which operates the Haffner's c-store banner on the East Coast. That list also included Waltham, Massachusetts-based Global Partners, which has publicly expressed its frustration with the MDT's decision in the days since it came down. Global Partners emphasized that its proposal was more cost-effective than Applegreen's and is pushing the MDT to keep the state's infrastructure local instead of working with a foreign company. Global Partners said in a June 13 announcement opposing the MDT's decision that its pitch for the travel plazas included over $1.5 billion in guaranteed rent and $650 million in capital improvements. While Applegreen's accepted pitch included $750 million in capital improvements, it is expected to bring in between $623 million and $994 million over the lifetime of the deal, according to the MDT's June 18 meeting. 'In a decision that defies logic and long-term fiscal responsibility, MassDOT recently awarded the 35-year MA Pike rest-stop lease to a bidder offering nearly $900 million LESS in rent than Global Partners' local offer,' Global Partners said in a LinkedIn post on Wednesday that has since been deleted. 'That's $900 million that could have helped offset budget gaps, fix roads and bridges, and spare taxpayers from looming toll hikes and excise increases.' Bosworth said in the June 18 meeting that Applegreen's pitch included three types of plaza designs: coastal, metro and western, all of which will be deployed depending on which part of the state each store is in. While each location will be slightly different, they'll all focus on creating more dwell time for consumers. Meanwhile, Global Partners' pitch included strategic partnerships with local food companies and regional QSRs, as well as an increased focus on 'guest experience, sustainability, and equity,' according to its June 14 announcement. It did not mention anything regarding store designs. 'Our proposal wasn't just financially stronger; it was built on our 90-year history of local investment, partnerships with homegrown businesses, and a vision for infrastructure that reflects the Commonwealth's identity,' Mark Romaine, chief operating officer for Global Partners, said in the June 14 announcement. 'This isn't just about who operates a travel plaza — it's about who we are as a state.' Global Partners is urging residents to contact Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey and state legislators 'to demand transparency, accountability, and a deal that puts Massachusetts first' in an attempt to reverse the MDT's decision. 'This fight for Massachusetts is not over,' the company said in a June 18 statement. 'As MassDOT enters the next phase of the bid process, we hope they will truly consider what they're giving up for the Commonwealth and weigh the risks before signing a lease.' Recommended Reading Applegreen to spend $750M remodeling 18 Massachusetts travel plazas
Forbes
2 days ago
- Forbes
An EV Roadtrip Shows The Value Of Hotel Charging And How To Price It
Map of an EV road trip. Lightning bolts are mostly hotels, Stalls are superchargers Most of the debate on EV charging infrastructure focuses on the desire for fast charging stations, which recharge a car in 30-60 minutes. Up to $7B of federal money has been allocated to build those, though this may vanish with a recent executive order from President Trump. These stations have value, but it turns out that charging at motels is even more important, and it gets almost no attention. The issues around how to get charging at most hotels, how to make it convenient and how to price it are key issues for EV travel infrastructure. Ideally, when taking a road trip, one stays at a hotel with EV charging which refills the car overnight while the driver sleeps. Such charging is vastly cheaper (in fact, often provided free to guests) and more convenient, as it involves no driving out of your way or time spent waiting—it happens when you sleep. The driver wakes up to a full, warm car and depending on their itinerary may do all their driving on that energy, or on hard-slog road trips, can at least get to lunch for a fast charge. In shorter range cars or very intense driving, they may use another fast charge before their hotel. This is important because fast charging has become very expensive. It's not unusual to see fast chargers costing 60¢/kWh. Tesla stations tend to be 40-50¢. It's hard to make a business fast charging and that's forced many providers to charge these very high prices. (The average cost of electricity in the USA is now up to 17¢/kWh, but depends on the state and time of day, ranging from 9¢ to 40¢.) Fast charging thus costs anywhere from 10 to 15 cents per mile, which is similar to, and sometimes more, than the cost of gasoline in average cars, and more than that for an efficient hybrid. EV owners definitely didn't buy their EVs to pay more for energy than they did with gasoline cars. Because hotel charging is often free to guests, that can make a big difference. For drivers going 400-500 miles/day, that means one hotel charge and one fast charge, and cuts the total cost in half. On a recent road trip I took of 2800 miles from California to Utah, the first half was slower paced, and the second half was a fast return home. I picked up 500 kWh at superchargers and roughly 300 kWh from hotels (all free except one hotel at 25¢/kWh.) That made my trip much cheaper, and about $200 less than in my old gasoline powered Acura TL, and of course, lower emissions. For the first half the trip, the ratio of hotel and fast chargers was about even. Two Teslas charging at a hotel at Bryce Canyon National Park. The left one is keeping itself warm ... More and meling the snow. I also gained from charging my first and last 200 miles at home from my solar panels. While that power's already paid for, any power like this that I use rather than feed back to the California grid effectively loses me just 7¢/kWh. (Alternately, home solar at today's interest rates costs about 10¢/kWh.) Can it be Free? My typical hotel charge was around 40 kWh. At the average Utah price of 11.4¢, that's around $4.50 cost to the hotel. At the national average closer to $7. The value to me is much greater, because otherwise I will have to pay 40-60¢ at a fast charger, or around $20, plus a lot of inconvenience. This easily justifies going to a pricier hotel if it has charging, and you get all the other benefits of the higher-end hotel. But today we're seeing many different pricing decisions by hotels: Many hotels are being pulled to the 'minibar' style of pricing, a premium or super-premium price well above the ordinary retail price, because the hotel guest is a captive customer getting convenience. Those who do so can make a modest profit on charging, and also reduce contention at their stalls, as guests will no longer use the charging unless they truly need it. (It's ironic that minibars often lose money even at their high prices and are mostly being removed from hotels.) The more interesting dynamic applies to how guests choose their hotel. Today, EV roadtrippers are more rare—on this trip, outside of Las Vegas and Reno, we didn't see another EV charging at these hotels, though the stalls in those Nevada cities were full and cars were turned away. Those EV roadtrippers who do look for it will always choose a hotel with charging over one without if they are even roughly comparable. They will choose a hotel with free-to-guests charging over one that charges premium fees, even if the former hotel is $20 more per night, for simple financial reasons—you get the free charge and a better hotel for the same total spend. Today, almost all road trip hotels provide breakfast 'free' to guests. Estimates suggest this simple breakfast costs the hotel around $4-$5 per person, or $10-$15 per room depending on occupancy. More expensive hotels often charge extra for breakfast but for the mid-range motorist hotels, free-to-guests breakfast is now a must-have feature in rural America. It costs more per room than charging, so that suggests we might get a world were free-to-guests charging is a standard amenity in order to get EV driving guests. At the same time, the minibar pricing plan is also growing in popularity. There's an irony that metered stalls cost a lot more than simple ones, so in many cases the premium fee is charged to cover the cost of being able to do billing. Many of the free-to-guests chargers are Tesla Destination Chargers, which Tesla provided free to many hotels. Tesla doesn't forbid the hotel charging, but there was no mechanism so most don't. (This is changing as Tesla now supports billing.) Even so, a fancy public station with credit card processing can cost 5 times as much, for the equipment, as a basic one, though the electrician can cost more. One factor that could change this would be a facility for guaranteed reservations. Drivers want to be sure they can charge, though in most places today if they can't, they just have to waste time at a fast charger, perhaps during dinner after they check in and see all stalls are taken. Drivers will likely be willing to pay reservation costs that cover the cost of the electricity, so the hotel gets that paid for while also winning a stay. At present, there are no systems for hotels to automate reservation of charging stalls, but this can come. Today's option involves a hotel staffer putting a cone in a space or parking a car in one to hold it. Guests will still stay at hotels with premium fees, but they will no longer consider them an automatic win over other hotels. As the EV transition progresses, there will be few hotels with no charging, the only question will be the price, whether a spot can be reserved, and if not, how many stalls there are. Hotels without charging will just not get any EV guests at some point, and be pushed to make the change. Fortunately, with modern power management, hotels can often install lots of stalls without boosting their electrical service, as long as power use in the hotel goes down at night, leaving capacity for the cars. (Disclaimer: I have an investment in a company which sells such tools.) One possible pricing scheme, not in use today would be a combination price, such as a low ($5) flat reservation fee (or even free) for a typical charge of up to 40 kWh (around 160 miles) with reasonable per-kWh fees above that to recover costs on large battery cars. Footnote: A large fraction of hotels have an exterior 120v dedicated plug they will let you use. Carry your adapter. It may seem of limited use to add only 50 miles (which is about all such a plug will do) but that means more time and options in the morning, and it's like having a bigger battery. 30a RV plugs (different adapter) can give you 100 miles, which can make a real difference, especially if staying 2 nights.
Forbes
2 days ago
- Forbes
Want To Fly On A Top 20 Airline? Look Outside America
High-quality, high-touch personal service like that provided by flight attendants like these from ... More Qatar Airways is why such carriers rank atop Skytrax's annual rankings of best airlines, a list U.S. airlines rarely make. (Photo byfor Qatar Airways) Odds are that if you're an American, and you live in America, and you've never traveled much outside of America, then you likely never have flown aboard any of the 20 best airlines in the world. Oh, to be sure, some Americans have flown – and may even fly regularly – on the likes of Qatar Airways, Koren Air or even Starlux Airlines. But since the three largest airlines in the world – Delta, American and United – are all based in the U.S., and have powerful frequent flier programs that tend to lock in their customers' loyalty wherever they fly anywhere in the world, only a small percentage of Americans ever have flown on non-U.S. carriers. And since no U.S.-flagged carrier ranked among the top 20 in the world this year - per a survey of world travelers conducted by British travel customer service consulting firm Skytrax - it's safe bet that only a small percentage of Americans ever have traveled on any of the current 20 best airlines in the world. Does that mean that U.S. carriers are 'bad' when it comes to pleasing their passengers? No, not necessarily. But clearly, providing the highest levels of personal service to the nearly 1 billion passengers who board their flights annually (in 2024 U.S. airlines carried a record 982.6 million), is not the top focus of U.S. airlines; certainly not the way it is with many big-name – and not-so-big-name – foreign carriers listed on the Skytrax Top 20. Rather, U.S. carriers, which have the exclusive legal rights to carry all passengers traveling between any two points within the world's largest travel market (the United States), focus more on maintaining huge passenger volumes. And to do that they use comparatively low fares as their primary competitive tool, while most foreign carriers use high-touch personal serviceas their principal commercial weapon. Thats why most big foreign carriers deploy significantly more flight attendants and airport customers service staffers than do U.S. carriers. And those typically thinner employees-to-passengers staffing ratios are largely why U.S. carriers rarely make Skytrax's annual list of top airlines This year's Top 20 carriers, announced by Skytrax in mid-June at the start of the prestigious Paris Air Show, was topped by Qatar Airways (based in Doha), followed by Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific based in Hong Kong, Emirates (based in Doha, UAE), and ANA All Nippon Airways (Tokyo). It was Qatar's ninth time to be listed atop that list in the 26 years since Skytrax began ranking carriers based on their reported levels of satisfaction. Four of those top five carriers are based in what essentially are city-states with relatively small but extremely wealthy local markets. To serve such markets, Qatar, Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific and Emirates emphasize providing high-quality, high-touch personal service to justify the higher fare prices that most of their passengers pay. All Nippon's business formula also focuses on providing high-quality service to cover the high costs of operating to and from the largest city in the world, Tokyo, which also happens to be a very high cost market that is a long distance from nearly all other major world cities. Similarly, four of the five airlines ranked 6 through 10 on Skytrax's list of best airlines in the world – Turkish Airlines (Istanbul), Korean Air (Seoul), Air France (Paris) and Japan Airlines (Tokyo), primarily target international travelers who for cultural, historical and economic reasons expect high-quality services and higher average fares. No. 10 on the list, China's Hainan Airlines, is majority-owned by the Chinese government and struggles with profitability. But like most large Asian carriers, it emphasizes high-quality, high-touch service, too. The second tier of airlines on Skytrax's Top 20 list include No. 11, Swiss International Air Lines (Basel, Switzerland); No. 12 EVA Air (Taipei, Taiwan); No. 13 British Airways, London; No. 14, Qantas Airways (Sydney, Australia); No. 15 Lufthansa (Cologne, Germany), No. 16 Virgin Atlantic (London); No. 17 Saudi Arabian Airlines (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia); No. 18 Starlux Airlines (Taipei, Taiwan); No. 19 Air Canada (Montreal); and No. 20 Iberia (Madrid)
