News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Massport: Tolls for pickups/dropoffs at Logan Airport?

Started by SidS1045, August 28, 2017, 02:55:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SidS1045


According to an article in this morning's Boston Globe, the Massachusetts Port Authority will be studying imposing a fee on drivers who pick up or drop off passengers at Boston's Logan Airport.  Massport currently counts more than 20,000 such trips in and out of Logan every day.  The study is being pushed by the Conservation Law Foundation, which seems to think such a charge would reduce the number of such trips at a time when air travel is growing.


The quid pro quo for agreeing to the study?  The CLF will not oppose Massport adding 5000 more parking spaces at Logan.


The study is expected to be done by July 2019.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow


PHLBOS

Upshoot: if approved, those that reside in the North Shore and/or shunpike will no longer be immune from any tolls to/from the airport.

Personally, I hope this gets shot down.  And before someone mentions that the Dallas Forth-Worth Airport (DFW) does similar; there's a couple things to keep in mind:

1.  DFW tolls (for actually entering & exiting the airport itself) have been there since the airport first opened in 1974.

2.  The DFW toll monies collected go towards the building of & continued improvements to the airport.

There's no mention of where the proposed fee at Logan (BOS) will go to (major problem/issue right there) & based on the Globe article, the fee/toll reeks more of a bribe to CLF rather than raising funds for airport-related construction projects.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

kefkafloyd

I predict the study will go nowhere and Massport will build the 5K parking spaces which the airport desperately needs.

I don't think charging tolls will fix the core roadway problems that exist in certain terminals, specifically terminals B and C.

roadman

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 09:35:39 AM
I predict the study will go nowhere and Massport will build the 5K parking spaces which the airport desperately needs.

I don't think charging tolls will fix the core roadway problems that exist in certain terminals, specifically terminals B and C.

The problem is twofold.  First, per outdated and draconian FAA rules, Massport cannot use landing fees or other aviation charges to build or expand non-aviation facilities like parking garages.  Second, due to an early EPA ruling (1972?), Boston has had a cap on the total number of parking spaces in the City, including the airport.  These are the reasons that Massport is proposing this totally nonsensical idea of charging people for pickup and drop-off.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

froggie

Given that MassDOT has gone full AET for the Pike, perhaps tolls could be added to the Callahan Tunnel and returned to the northbound Tobin Bridge.  That would take care of most of the shunpiking mentioned by PHLBOS.  Wouldn't need much (if anything) in the way of Federal approval, either, and such tolls could easily be justified for tunnel/bridge maintenance (and could also balance out the existing tolls collected inbound).

Technically, because it's bridged over the T station, the ramps between I-90 and 1A North could theoretically be tolled as well, but this would A) require any such tolls to be used only for maintenance of the ramps, and B) would likely introduce shunpiking to the local street connections to the airport such as Maverick St, Porter St, Chelsea St, and Neptune Rd.

PHLBOS

Quote from: froggie on August 30, 2017, 10:07:25 AMGiven that MassDOT has gone full AET for the Pike, perhaps tolls could be added to the Callahan Tunnel and returned to the northbound Tobin Bridge.
2-way tolling returned to all the harbor crossings (new for the Ted Williams Tunnel) when all the systems, along with the Mass Pike, converted to AET nearly a year ago.

The shunpiking I was referring to was cutting through East Boston & Chelsea (via local roads) to MA 16 and/or MA 99.  Those routes can be used as a toll-free (but slower) means to get to Downtown Boston and/or I-93.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

roadman

Quote from: froggie on August 30, 2017, 10:07:25 AM
Given that MassDOT has gone full AET for the Pike, perhaps tolls could be added to the Callahan Tunnel and returned to the northbound Tobin Bridge.  That would take care of most of the shunpiking mentioned by PHLBOS.  Wouldn't need much (if anything) in the way of Federal approval, either, and such tolls could easily be justified for tunnel/bridge maintenance (and could also balance out the existing tolls collected inbound).

Technically, because it's bridged over the T station, the ramps between I-90 and 1A North could theoretically be tolled as well, but this would A) require any such tolls to be used only for maintenance of the ramps, and B) would likely introduce shunpiking to the local street connections to the airport such as Maverick St, Porter St, Chelsea St, and Neptune Rd.


Under AET, tolls have already been added to the Callahan Tunnel, the eastbound Ted Williams Tunnel, and returned to the northbound Tobin Bridge.  The Massport proposal would be to toll people who enter airport property for the purpose of picking up or dropping off people, and are not using their parking garages.  Remember that Massport is NOT part of MassDOT, but its own separate entity that doesn't see one dime of the toll revenue from the harbor tunnels or Tobin Bridge (ownership of which was transferred from Massport to MassDOT in 2009).
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

kefkafloyd

Quote from: roadman on August 30, 2017, 09:43:28 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 09:35:39 AM
I predict the study will go nowhere and Massport will build the 5K parking spaces which the airport desperately needs.

I don't think charging tolls will fix the core roadway problems that exist in certain terminals, specifically terminals B and C.

The problem is twofold.  First, per outdated and draconian FAA rules, Massport cannot use landing fees or other aviation charges to build or expand non-aviation facilities like parking garages.  Second, due to an early EPA ruling (1972?), Boston has had a cap on the total number of parking spaces in the City, including the airport.  These are the reasons that Massport is proposing this totally nonsensical idea of charging people for pickup and drop-off.

The East Boston Parking Freeze is something I'm familiar with. For those that want the gory details, https://www3.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/ma/MA_7_31.pdf

I'm curious how they'd still be able to get 5K more spaces even with a proposed toll or other means. Does it mean that Massport would go to the EPA to ask for an increase in the freeze?

The original article is here, for those wondering https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/08/27/dropping-off-friend-logan-could-cost-you/hMr9xTwmlyeXsMp3Rd1uVK/story.html

Personally I've been using Logan express purely for economic reasons. Parking even at the shuttle lots in Chelsea is just too expensive nowadays.

roadman

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 05:34:33 PM

I'm curious how they'd still be able to get 5K more spaces even with a proposed toll or other means. Does it mean that Massport would go to the EPA to ask for an increase in the freeze?

Presumably, if the CLF signs off on the parking increase, the EPA will accept it.  Which shouldn't be a problem given the "all regulation is evil" mentality of the current administration.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

PHLBOS

Should this toll become reality, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a push for a referendum ballot question to abolish such in the next election cycle... especially if someone like WRKO talk-show host & Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr leads the charge.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

The Nature Boy

Quote from: PHLBOS on August 31, 2017, 08:21:02 AM
Should this toll become reality, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a push for a referendum ballot question to abolish such in the next election cycle... especially if someone like WRKO talk-show host & Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr leads the charge.

I don't think that it'll be as controversial as you think. I would wager that a minority of Bostonians even utilize airport drop-off (owing in large part to the T). It would basically be a tax to capture out of town people, not too dissimilar to the tolls on I-95 in New Hampshire. As an out of town person who utilizes Logan, I would be a bit peeved but I'd deal with it.

Howie Carr getting involved would be the worst idea though. He's way too controversial and I can't see Massachusetts being swayed too much by a right wing talk show host. If there is a referendum, it'd be best for him to stay out of it.

Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: roadman on August 30, 2017, 09:43:28 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 09:35:39 AM
I predict the study will go nowhere and Massport will build the 5K parking spaces which the airport desperately needs.

I don't think charging tolls will fix the core roadway problems that exist in certain terminals, specifically terminals B and C.

The problem is twofold.  First, per outdated and draconian FAA rules, Massport cannot use landing fees or other aviation charges to build or expand non-aviation facilities like parking garages.  Second, due to an early EPA ruling (1972?), Boston has had a cap on the total number of parking spaces in the City, including the airport.  These are the reasons that Massport is proposing this totally nonsensical idea of charging people for pickup and drop-off.

The East Boston Parking Freeze is something I'm familiar with. For those that want the gory details, https://www3.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/ma/MA_7_31.pdf

I'm curious how they'd still be able to get 5K more spaces even with a proposed toll or other means. Does it mean that Massport would go to the EPA to ask for an increase in the freeze?

The original article is here, for those wondering https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/08/27/dropping-off-friend-logan-could-cost-you/hMr9xTwmlyeXsMp3Rd1uVK/story.html

Personally I've been using Logan express purely for economic reasons. Parking even at the shuttle lots in Chelsea is just too expensive nowadays.

I have a friend who just parks at Wonderland or one of the other Blue Line stops and then just takes the T to Logan. I think parking is like 5 bucks a day so even with the T fare, she still comes out ahead.

PHLBOS

Quote from: The Nature Boy on August 31, 2017, 08:38:45 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 31, 2017, 08:21:02 AM
Should this toll become reality, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a push for a referendum ballot question to abolish such in the next election cycle... especially if someone like WRKO talk-show host & Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr leads the charge.
I don't think that it'll be as controversial as you think. I would wager that a minority of Bostonians even utilize airport drop-off (owing in large part to the T). It would basically be a tax to capture out of town people, not too dissimilar to the tolls on I-95 in New Hampshire. As an out of town person who utilizes Logan, I would be a bit peeved but I'd deal with it.
First of all, not all North Shore residents (I lived in Marblehead for the first 24 years of my life) use the T or Logan Express (out of Peabody) to get to the airport.  On many occasions, those residents will have a family member and/or friend give them a ride to/from the airport.  I did such several times when I lived there & was old enough to drive.  If I still resided there; this toll would indeed impact me.

Second, assuming that your listed age & location are true & current; you are not old enough nor geographically close enough to remember past referendums that either lowered taxes (Proposition 2-1/2) and even tossed out the state's seat belt law (for a few years until the Feds clamped down).  Massachusetts is known for such; despite re-electing politicians that are more often than not opposed to such referendums (but that's another topic for another forum).

Quote from: The Nature Boy on August 31, 2017, 08:38:45 AMHowie Carr getting involved would be the worst idea though. He's way too controversial and I can't see Massachusetts being swayed too much by a right wing talk show host. If there is a referendum, it'd be best for him to stay out of it.
Au contraire & see above-reply, a talk-show host backing a referendum has time-and-time again proven to be successful in the Bay State despite the political demographic.  The late-Jerry Williams (also a WRKO talk-show host) proved such single-handedly winning the seat belt law repeal referendum in 1986 & rolling back the controversial State Legislative pay-raise in 1988.  More recently, a referendum on repealing automatic gas tax increases passed; no doubt fueled by both talk-radio & some newspaper columnists.

History could repeat itself here; especially since the proposed toll reeks of either a bribe or extortion.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

kefkafloyd

Quote from: The Nature Boy on August 31, 2017, 08:38:45 AM

I have a friend who just parks at Wonderland or one of the other Blue Line stops and then just takes the T to Logan. I think parking is like 5 bucks a day so even with the T fare, she still comes out ahead.

Indeed, and I've done the same at Alewife (if my schedule allows it and I don't have any bags).

I don't think people realize how bad parking at the airport is. Central or terminal B parking is $35/day. The economy garage is $26/day. Most of the off-airport places are up to $19.95/day, and that's with paying up front.

It makes Logan Express, with a $22 roundtrip (Woburn) and $7/day parking, look like a veritable steal. Of course, people try to avoid this altogether with drop off/pickups, and that causes a lot of congestion at the airport. I don't think a nominal toll will deter much of that traffic, though. To really get people to think twice you'd have to charge them a lot more than a $5 r/t toll.

Rothman

Of course, they could further develop Hanscom to take pressure off of Logan, too.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

PHLBOS

Quote from: Rothman on August 31, 2017, 05:44:48 PM
Of course, they could further develop Hanscom to take pressure off of Logan, too.
Good luck with that.  The locals near Hanscom (BED) went absolutely ballistic when Shuttle America (when it was still an independent carrier) offered service there 15 to 20 years ago.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

SectorZ

Quote from: PHLBOS on September 01, 2017, 09:11:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 31, 2017, 05:44:48 PM
Of course, they could further develop Hanscom to take pressure off of Logan, too.
Good luck with that.  The locals near Hanscom (BED) went absolutely ballistic when Shuttle America (when it was still an independent carrier) offered service there 15 to 20 years ago.

https://maps.bts.dot.gov/arcgis/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=a303ff5924c9474790464cc0e9d5c9fb

Zoom in to the relevant area of Massachusetts. People in the south end of my town are even starting to complain about Hanscom. I rarely hear stuff from it (on rare occasion hear Logan landings), but I would think a second battle of Lexington and Concord would start if they expanded it even more. Not that it's a bad idea. I'd love to see people utilize Manchester more, just because it's underutilized in the first place after all the expansion there.

kefkafloyd

For better or worse MHT and PVD have to be the alternates. BED seeing new commercial service is on the same level as building a new airport.

PHLBOS

Quote from: kefkafloyd on September 01, 2017, 09:39:13 AM
For better or worse MHT and PVD have to be the alternates.
For sure, and Southwest did a half-decent job of making those 2 airports relevant with their A Better Way to Boston catch-phrase they used for during their early years there.  However, they're setting up shop at Logan (BOS) has kind of put any plans of expansion at MHT & PVD on indefinite hold.

Since the airline industry has been deregulated since 1978; the majority of airlines (legacy carriers in particular) adopted the hub-and-spoke model.  Meaning that their (the airlines) operations at smaller airports (like MHT & PVD) only offered nonstop service to their respective hubs.  As a result, carriers resorted to using smaller equipment (planes) to serve these smaller airports and the fares (especially on uncontested routes) started soaring due to the smaller equipments' CASM (Cost per Available Seat Mile).  Why fly Airline X out of MHT/PVD to a destination when the flight w/the same carrier out of BOS is cheaper and has a greater frequency.

Furthermore, JetBlue's growth & success at BOS was largely the result of slot restrictions imposed on all 3 NYC-area airports (JFK, LGA & EWR) prevented them from expanding their JFK hub any further.  That coupled with improved access to BOS (courtesy of the Ted Williams Tunnel) along with the longer (at most airports) post-9/11 security cue/screening times meant that one no longer needed to drive further (in most instances) to a smaller, more remote airport to get decent fares.  This caused Southwest to take notice and come to BOS.

Long story short; airlines being forced to curb their services at larger airports in favor of using smaller ones nearby isn't going to happen unless the Feds or a governing authority gets involved.  Since Massport doesn't have jurisdiction over MHT & PVD (IIRC); there's not much they can do to promote the use of those two airports.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

froggie

QuoteSince the airline industry has been deregulated since 1978; the majority of airlines (legacy carriers in particular) adopted the hub-and-spoke model.

Southwest being a notable exception to this.

I'd also like to note that, in our experience, flight costs out of MHT are comparable to BOS, with the added advantages of FAR cheaper parking and being an hour closer for those in Vermont and New Hampshire.  Though NHDOT is widening I-93 between Manchester and Salem, that highway can still be a slog.

PHLBOS

Quote from: froggie on September 03, 2017, 07:39:51 AM
QuoteSince the airline industry has been deregulated since 1978; the majority of airlines (legacy carriers in particular) adopted the hub-and-spoke model.

Southwest being a notable exception to this.
While technically true (they indeed offer more point-to-point service to various (& smaller) airports than their legacy competitors); their ops at either Baltimore (BWI) or Chicago-Midway (MDW), for examples, certainly resemble hub operations even though Southwest doesn't consider the word to be part of their vocabulary.

Quote from: froggie on September 03, 2017, 07:39:51 AM
I'd also like to note that, in our experience, flight costs out of MHT are comparable to BOS, with the added advantages of FAR cheaper parking and being an hour closer for those in Vermont and New Hampshire.  Though NHDOT is widening I-93 between Manchester and Salem, that highway can still be a slog.
Given that you reside in Vermont; using MHT over BOS is largely a no-brainer... especially if the fares out of both airports are comparable.  However, for one that resides in the Greater Boston area (especially inside of 95/128); such can be more of a toss-up.  Similar is true for PVD for those living south of Boston.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

The Nature Boy

Quote from: PHLBOS on September 05, 2017, 12:17:46 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 03, 2017, 07:39:51 AM
QuoteSince the airline industry has been deregulated since 1978; the majority of airlines (legacy carriers in particular) adopted the hub-and-spoke model.

Southwest being a notable exception to this.
While technically true (they indeed offer more point-to-point service to various (& smaller) airports than their legacy competitors); their ops at either Baltimore (BWI) or Chicago-Midway (MDW), for examples, certainly resemble hub operations even though Southwest doesn't consider the word to be part of their vocabulary.

Quote from: froggie on September 03, 2017, 07:39:51 AM
I'd also like to note that, in our experience, flight costs out of MHT are comparable to BOS, with the added advantages of FAR cheaper parking and being an hour closer for those in Vermont and New Hampshire.  Though NHDOT is widening I-93 between Manchester and Salem, that highway can still be a slog.
Given that you reside in Vermont; using MHT over BOS is largely a no-brainer... especially if the fares out of both airports are comparable.  However, for one that resides in the Greater Boston area (especially inside of 95/128); such can be more of a toss-up.  Similar is true for PVD for those living south of Boston.

There are a lot of people north of Manchester that will bypass Manchester for Logan because of the wider availability of flights. I lived in New Hampshire, on the Vermont border, for a few years and most people I knew just flew in and out of Boston. There are some flights that are far more expensive out of Manchester and the lack of direct flights adds to the inconvenience.

froggie

^ Given that we predominantly fly Southwest which has fairly easy hops from MHT (and 3 a day just to BWI...a "hub" if you will using PHLBOS's parlance), the "wider availability of flights" at Logan isn't really a bonus.  But to each their own...

PHLBOS

Quote from: The Nature Boy on September 05, 2017, 12:28:24 PMThere are some flights that are far more expensive out of Manchester
Obviously, those expensive flights that you speak have no competition w/Southwest.
GPS does NOT equal GOD



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.