News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

MassPike AET discussion

Started by SidS1045, June 13, 2016, 11:42:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pete from Boston

Article about toll plaza demolition plans:

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/08/mass_turnpike_electronic_tolli_1.html

Gives an outline of the process, along with a lot of generalizations about the overall changes.


bob7374

In other MassPike news, MassDOT has hired a 'Tollpayer Advocate' to help with the transition to AET (they still plan an October start of AET if the software tests correctly):
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-announces-appointment-of-leonard-fournier-as-tollpayer-advocate/

bob7374


PHLBOS

Looking at the toll schedule (note the two E-ZPass rates for the Weston gantry are reversed); here's a sample comparision for a Mass Pike trip I normally do on holiday weekends.

Exit 9 (I-84) to Exit 14 (I-95/Rte. 128):

Current toll $1.75

AET E-ZPass (MA):$1.75
AET E-ZPass (Other):$2.10
Toll-By-Plate:$3.45

Upshoot: There will now be E-ZPass-type discrimination, tolls for out-of-state E-ZPass users will go up a tad AND Non-E-ZPass users WILL get financially hosed.

This was something that my older brother warned me about; the implementation of AET being used as an excuse to hike the tolls.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Pete from Boston

Quote from: bob7374 on August 22, 2016, 11:48:11 AM
In other MassPike news, MassDOT has hired a 'Tollpayer Advocate' to help with the transition to AET (they still plan an October start of AET if the software tests correctly):
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-announces-appointment-of-leonard-fournier-as-tollpayer-advocate/


It was disclosed separately that this individual was appointed four months earlier, and is a donor in the amount of $1125 to the Baker election fund.

There also seems to be no contact info through which the public may funnel their concerns through him. Perhaps the idea is that because he uses his E-ZPass 10 to 15 times per month, he is already aware of toll payers' needs.


vdeane

Boo on the transponder discrimination.  Didn't someone say in another thread that E-ZPass regulations banned transponder discrimination and that the places that do were merely grandfathered in?  How are they getting away with this?  Transponder discrimination should be ILLEGAL.

Plus who wants to have 10 lines in their E-ZPass statement where there's only one now?  IMO they should have just done a virtual "ticket" system and kept the existing tolls.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

bob7374

Here's the official MassDOT blog entry regarding the proposed AET toll rates, toll plaza demolition, and public hearings regarding tolls:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-moves-forward-on-all-electronic-tolling/

cl94

While I don't like the transponder discrimination, the penalty is pretty minimal compared to other agencies.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Pete from Boston

It's exploitive of the reality that the Northeast has many small jurisdictions. Unless there's a demonstrable equivalent cost associated with out-of-state transactions, this should be eliminated.  Not only does it penalize use of a technology whose adoption is collectively beneficial, it ignores the reality of commerce in 2016 where untold instantaneous electronic transactions happen constantly without arbitrary 20% fees.

SidS1045

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow

PHLBOS

Quote from: SidS1045 on August 22, 2016, 09:45:16 PM
I know that you only posted the information but some of those listed gantry rates appear different from the earlier-posted MassDOT listings.

The former (see Reply #27) for a Sturbridge to Weston trip indicated no toll increase for an MA E-ZPass user; assuming the listed Weston rates for the 2 E-ZPass users were mistakenly transposed.

Either way, this could turn into a PR nightmare for MassDOT (like they really need another one) because they have been touting that this AET conversion would be revenue neutral for most users since such was first proposed.

While a higher Toll-By-Plate rate was to be expected; if the rate is pushed too high, there will be a blowback from motorists.  Sections of US 20 could see an increase of traffic as a result as well if more people shunpike.

Although such has been around, in one shape or form, for about 2 decades; contrary to popular belief, not everybody has signed up for one.  Those that don't use toll facilities that often or at all typically don't have E-ZPass accounts.  To many, such is just another thing to carry; plus, many agencies (Mass IIRC used to back in its Fast-Lane days) charge an annual fee (up to $12/year) to carry an E-ZPass account.  One has to do the math to determine if their discounted tolls (if any) will offset the annual fee.   In the old days, when the E-ZPass vs. cash toll rates didn't vary as much; the annual fee was indeed the decision-maker (or deal-breaker) for whether or not to get an E-ZPass account.

However, I am told that MassDOT now does not charge an annual fee for E-ZPass accounts so that might be more of an incentive to get an MA E-ZPass account.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

cl94

Even so, if those are indeed the rates, it might be enough to push me over to VT/NH 9 and NH 101 for trips east. Looking at the big picture, the rate hike is insane for out-of-state and cash users.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

tckma

Quote from: PHLBOS on August 23, 2016, 10:38:43 AM

Although such has been around, in one shape or form, for about 2 decades; contrary to popular belief, not everybody has signed up for one.  Those that don't use toll facilities that often or at all typically don't have E-ZPass accounts.  To many, such is just another thing to carry; plus, many agencies (Mass IIRC used to back in its Fast-Lane days) charge an annual fee (up to $12/year) to carry an E-ZPass account.  One has to do the math to determine if their discounted tolls (if any) will offset the annual fee.   In the old days, when the E-ZPass vs. cash toll rates didn't vary as much; the annual fee was indeed the decision-maker (or deal-breaker) for whether or not to get an E-ZPass account.

However, I am told that MassDOT now does not charge an annual fee for E-ZPass accounts so that might be more of an incentive to get an MA E-ZPass account.

I lived in MA when I first got an E-Z Pass account, and they didn't charge an annual fee, ever.  My first E-Z Pass tag, in fact, said "Bank of Boston Fast Lane."  When I moved to VA and then MD, I never switched to those state's E-Z Pass systems simply because they charged an annual fee and I didn't use toll facilities that much anyway.  The discount on the Mass Pike and Logan tunnels were no longer of use to me, but to me, the monthly fee didn't offset the $1 or $2 extra on the $8 I-95 bridge the one or two times a year I used it.  In fact, I only closed my MA Fast Lane account, switching it to a Maryland E-Z Pass, last July when Gov. Hogan got rid of the monthly fee.  If I'm going to get a toll discount, I may as well get it on the $8 bridge the one or two times a year I use it, rather than on the Mass Pike the 0 times I year I use that now that I don't live in Mass anymore.

tckma

Quote from: Pete from Boston on August 22, 2016, 09:17:09 PM
It's exploitive of the reality that the Northeast has many small jurisdictions. Unless there's a demonstrable equivalent cost associated with out-of-state transactions, this should be eliminated.  Not only does it penalize use of a technology whose adoption is collectively beneficial, it ignores the reality of commerce in 2016 where untold instantaneous electronic transactions happen constantly without arbitrary 20% fees.

My understanding was that transponder discrimination was ruled legal on the grounds that anybody can get an E-Z Pass from any state regardless of the state of residence, and you could conceivably carry a bunch of different transponders in your car.  Realistically, though, no one is going to do that, and E-Z Pass websites even ask your state and direct you to that state.

cl94

Quote from: tckma on August 23, 2016, 03:07:23 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on August 22, 2016, 09:17:09 PM
It's exploitive of the reality that the Northeast has many small jurisdictions. Unless there's a demonstrable equivalent cost associated with out-of-state transactions, this should be eliminated.  Not only does it penalize use of a technology whose adoption is collectively beneficial, it ignores the reality of commerce in 2016 where untold instantaneous electronic transactions happen constantly without arbitrary 20% fees.

My understanding was that transponder discrimination was ruled legal on the grounds that anybody can get an E-Z Pass from any state regardless of the state of residence, and you could conceivably carry a bunch of different transponders in your car.  Realistically, though, no one is going to do that, and E-Z Pass websites even ask your state and direct you to that state.

Or you have something like New York, who will issue a NY E-ZPass to someone out of state, but will send them a Port Authority one with a service fee unless they buy one from NYSTA or the MTA in person. Normally, downstate gets MTA and Upstate/Ontario gets NYSTA, Ontario because the Niagara Falls bridges issue NYSTA ones.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

kefkafloyd

Mass, as far as I know, never charged an annual fee. However, you did have to shell out for the transponder (which was something like ten dollars). You spent $20, which covered the cost of the transponder and opened up your account for a $10 balance. I'm still running on my 2004-era transponder that I paid ten dollars for.

Nowadays, transponders from MassDOT are free. IMO the rate between in-state and out-of-state transponders is fair, but those pay-by-plate rates are stiff, especially for the state line to Boston rate. Most people might not squawk about paying an extra dollar for going from 84 to 128, but people in Western Mass who don't have transponders WILL be griping about this.

QuoteBeginning after Labor Day, MassDOT is planning to hold seven public hearings about AET. Comments made during these public meetings, or submitted in writing, will help inform deliberations by the MassDOT Board, which plans to vote on the new AET charges in October

Better get to those public hearings...

cl94

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 23, 2016, 04:03:16 PM
Mass, as far as I know, never charged an annual fee. However, you did have to shell out for the transponder (which was something like ten dollars). You spent $20, which covered the cost of the transponder and opened up your account for a $10 balance. I'm still running on my 2004-era transponder.

Nowadays, transponders from MassDOT are free. IMO the rate between in-state and out-of-state transponders is fair, but those pay-by-plate rates are stiff, especially for the state line to Boston rate. Most people might not squawk about paying an extra dollar for going from 84 to 128, but people in Western Mass who don't have transponders WILL be griping about this.

QuoteBeginning after Labor Day, MassDOT is planning to hold seven public hearings about AET. Comments made during these public meetings, or submitted in writing, will help inform deliberations by the MassDOT Board, which plans to vote on the new AET charges in October

Better get to those public hearings...

If they have one in Springfield or west and it's not on a Monday/Thursday night, I could probably get to one and report back
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

bob7374

Quote from: cl94 on August 23, 2016, 04:05:21 PM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 23, 2016, 04:03:16 PM
Mass, as far as I know, never charged an annual fee. However, you did have to shell out for the transponder (which was something like ten dollars). You spent $20, which covered the cost of the transponder and opened up your account for a $10 balance. I'm still running on my 2004-era transponder.

Nowadays, transponders from MassDOT are free. IMO the rate between in-state and out-of-state transponders is fair, but those pay-by-plate rates are stiff, especially for the state line to Boston rate. Most people might not squawk about paying an extra dollar for going from 84 to 128, but people in Western Mass who don't have transponders WILL be griping about this.

QuoteBeginning after Labor Day, MassDOT is planning to hold seven public hearings about AET. Comments made during these public meetings, or submitted in writing, will help inform deliberations by the MassDOT Board, which plans to vote on the new AET charges in October

Better get to those public hearings...

If they have one in Springfield or west and it's not on a Monday/Thursday night, I could probably get to one and report back
Meeting in Springfield on Wed. Sept. 14. Rest of the public meeting dates are here:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/all-electronic-tolling-fare-structure-public-meetings-set/

cl94

Quote from: bob7374 on August 23, 2016, 06:28:05 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 23, 2016, 04:05:21 PM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 23, 2016, 04:03:16 PM
Mass, as far as I know, never charged an annual fee. However, you did have to shell out for the transponder (which was something like ten dollars). You spent $20, which covered the cost of the transponder and opened up your account for a $10 balance. I'm still running on my 2004-era transponder.

Nowadays, transponders from MassDOT are free. IMO the rate between in-state and out-of-state transponders is fair, but those pay-by-plate rates are stiff, especially for the state line to Boston rate. Most people might not squawk about paying an extra dollar for going from 84 to 128, but people in Western Mass who don't have transponders WILL be griping about this.

QuoteBeginning after Labor Day, MassDOT is planning to hold seven public hearings about AET. Comments made during these public meetings, or submitted in writing, will help inform deliberations by the MassDOT Board, which plans to vote on the new AET charges in October

Better get to those public hearings...

If they have one in Springfield or west and it's not on a Monday/Thursday night, I could probably get to one and report back
Meeting in Springfield on Wed. Sept. 14. Rest of the public meeting dates are here:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/all-electronic-tolling-fare-structure-public-meetings-set/

Perfect. I have Wednesdays off. First class on Thursday isn't until 10, so I expect to be there. I'll provide a summary on this thread later that evening or the next day.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

kefkafloyd

Also, with regards to the potential take rate on pay-by-plate, MassDOT has 75% EZPass transactions on the Turnpike west of Weston, and 81% east of Weston, with 75% on harbor crossings. While I don't know how that compares to similar jurisdictions (I would love to know NH and NY's EZPass usage rates), that's still a pretty good percentage of toll transactions. (see: http://www.massdotinnovation.com/Pdfs/Session1D-AllElectronicTolling.pdf )

Given that, the statement of revenue neutral for most users is pretty much true, as the vast majority of turnpike/toll payers are using EZPass.

The real question is how much leakage the turnpike will get from people who won't pay their tolls from pay-by-plate. There's ways to discourage that for in-state registrations (refuse license/registration renewals for people with outstanding toll bills) but out of state is basically playing roulette. I'm guessing the state is banking on the fact that eliminating toll booths and simplifying interchanges will outweigh the lost revenue (as well as the rate hike for PBP).

I will be curious to see how many current cash users will switch to EZPass. Cash users fall either into rare/occasional pike users or those who have ideological objections to EZPass. Not much can be done about the latter, except maybe their concerns about their wallets will finally overcome those objections. The occasional users out west will be loud and I'm guessing that PBP toll rate will be reduced before go-live. No way will people accept the nearly doubling of a toll for a non-EZPass user who goes from Stockbridge to Boston.

cl94

NYSTA gets that south of Newburgh, as do the TBTA crossings. NYSTA gets ~50% in the Buffalo area.

What I'd like to know here is the percentage of E-ZPass users from out of state. As the NY discount is huge compared to the current discount in just about any state other than Maine, most people in CT with E-ZPass as well as many in western Massachusetts have one from NYSTA or the MTA. A lot of the traffic past Worcester is out-of-state and, if these rates go through, a lot of them will bleed off to I-84, US 6, MA 2, US 20 and/or VT/NH 9. I know I'd seriously consider dealing with 2, 9, or 20 if I'm not in a rush.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

mtantillo

I read somewhere that something like 90% of EZP transactions on MTA facilities are with in-state transponders, 8% NJ, and 2% all other states. Since the MTA bridges aren't on long haul interstate routes, and since many users from out of state are NYC/LI expats with NY accounts or visitors that got NY accounts in the 1990s when it was the only place to get one, that breakdown makes sense.

Keep in mind that MTA is the only NYS agency that discriminates.

The MassPike toll rates are fair, IMO, even if I'm not a fan of transponder discrimination. Leakage from out of state users is a problem if the person doesn't mind having their credit report jacked up with collection agency notes. Otherwise they can only suspend issuance of new registrations in MA, and NH/ME by reciprocal agreement.

I don't have a problem with every gantry pass showing up on my statement if it means they can post immediately. On facilities that combine multiple gantry passes into a "trip", the process takes too long, because they have to wait for all the non-reads to have the images processed, just in case your tag didn't read at one gantry. That usually results in a 5-10 dag delay in posting the trip. It's a major issue on the ICC and Virginia's express lanes.

kefkafloyd

Quote from: cl94 on August 23, 2016, 09:00:08 PM
NYSTA gets that south of Newburgh, as do the TBTA crossings. NYSTA gets ~50% in the Buffalo area.

What I'd like to know here is the percentage of E-ZPass users from out of state. As the NY discount is huge compared to the current discount in just about any state other than Maine, most people in CT with E-ZPass as well as many in western Massachusetts have one from NYSTA or the MTA. A lot of the traffic past Worcester is out-of-state and, if these rates go through, a lot of them will bleed off to I-84, US 6, MA 2, US 20 and/or VT/NH 9. I know I'd seriously consider dealing with 2, 9, or 20 if I'm not in a rush.

I doubt the level of shunpiking for non-enthusiasts will be that high. Unfortunately there's no real way to track out-of-state cash transactions at the moment unless they get a violation at an EZPass booth. I'm sure they've done tracking studies where they could get a statistical sample, but I cannot find any of those statistics. That could be something to ask about at the public meetings. But is someone who isn't an enthusiast going from Springfield really going to drive all the way through Route 20 to Boston to avoid a toll? Maybe if they don't value their time. The only real viable alternative route is route 2 and people who live in the northern part of the state (or have destinations north of 495) are already using it.

I'm betting the vast majority of out of state transactions happens on the 84-Boston area segment. The amount of traffic that goes through that dwarfs the mainline even east of Springfield.

PHLBOS

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 24, 2016, 08:33:30 AMBut is someone who isn't an enthusiast going from Springfield really going to drive all the way through Route 20 to Boston to avoid a toll? Maybe if they don't value their time. The only real viable alternative route is route 2 and people who live in the northern part of the state (or have destinations north of 495) are already using it.
While they won't use US 20 all the way through to Boston (or to I-95 in Waltham) unless word gets out about a horrific accident along the Pike (which can happen regardless of AET); they will likely use 20 up to either I-290/395 or MA 146 near the Blackstone Mall.

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 24, 2016, 08:33:30 AM
I'm betting the vast majority of out of state transactions happens on the 84-Boston area segment. The amount of traffic that goes through that dwarfs the mainline even east of Springfield.
My guess would be that the highest concentration of out-of-state transactions happen between I-84 (Sturbridge) & I-290/395 (Auburn); which is one reason why that 12-mile stretch of the Pike tends to be a bottleneck at the toll plazas.  AET will (hopefully) reduce or eliminate that bottleneck.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

kefkafloyd

Quote from: PHLBOS on August 24, 2016, 08:58:12 AMWhile they won't use US 20 all the way through to Boston (or to I-95 in Waltham) unless word gets out about a horrific accident along the Pike (which can happen regardless of AET); they will likely use 20 up to either I-290/395 or MA 146 near the Blackstone Mall.

Yes, I have done this before, and sometimes to avoid holiday traffic on that segment of the turnpike.

Quote from: PHLBOS on August 24, 2016, 08:58:12 AMMy guess would be that the highest concentration of out-of-state transactions happen between I-84 (Sturbridge) & I-290/395 (Auburn); which is one reason why that 12-mile stretch of the Pike tends to be a bottleneck at the toll plazas.  AET will (hopefully) reduce or eliminate that bottleneck.

Yes, this segment will improve considerably with AET. It won't completely eliminate slowdowns, but removal of tollbooths at exit 9 will help considerably since its geometry is pretty good and won't need much improvements to run at higher speed.

Exit 10 will be more difficult. While eliminating the tollbooths will help, the narrow and curvy ramps for both MA 12 and the interstates there will be a problem. I will be interested in seeing what MassDOT will propose for a reconfigured interchange. There's no room without considerable land takings and environmental impact. I'm pretty sure they'll punt on it.

495/90 is at least getting a look at complete reconstruction, as is the Allston/Brighton section (for a variety of reasons). The Weston 128/30/90 interchange's proposed reconstruction diagrams posted in the other thread looks sensible with what they have at hand.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.