Mackinac Bridge congestion

[Flint1979]

Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

The way interop agreements usually work would mean anyone with a MacPass would gain the benefit of being able to use it on any road in the E-ZPass zone. So there would not really be "competition" per se (other than to the extent that various flavors of E-ZPass offer different discounts on different facilities).

Now what would be really hilarious is if MacPass snubbed E-ZPass and joined the Pikepass zone instead.

If MacPass was EZPass compatible and I had one then I would be able to use it anywhere EZPass is accepted, I get that. But if it was vice versa then I think the Mackinac Bridge authority would be screwing themselves unless there was some type of agreement where they could become compatible. It's currently $88 for the MacPass with the deposit, the admin fee and the sticker, so if it accepted EZPass someone with EZPass then could just go through there without having to pay the $88.

[Scott5114]

What the heck are they charging $88 for?

Even OTA only requires $40, and 100% of that is your initial account balance.

[Molandfreak]

Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

The way interop agreements usually work would mean anyone with a MacPass would gain the benefit of being able to use it on any road in the E-ZPass zone. So there would not really be "competition" per se (other than to the extent that various flavors of E-ZPass offer different discounts on different facilities).

Now what would be really hilarious is if MacPass snubbed E-ZPass and joined the Pikepass zone instead.

If MacPass was EZPass compatible and I had one then I would be able to use it anywhere EZPass is accepted, I get that. But if it was vice versa then I think the Mackinac Bridge authority would be screwing themselves unless there was some type of agreement where they could become compatible. It's currently $88 for the MacPass with the deposit, the admin fee and the sticker, so if it accepted EZPass someone with EZPass then could just go through there without having to pay the $88.

That is absolutely a potential problem, but it could be mitigated if the MBA offered a discount on tolls to those who bought MacPasses. Or maybe cutting the upfront cost since I have never heard of any other toll agency charging anywhere near $88 for a transponder.

[Molandfreak]

What the heck are they charging $88 for?

Even OTA only requires $40, and 100% of that is your initial account balance.

$80 of that is the initial account balance.

[Scott5114]

So they require you to prepay 20 $4 fares to get an account? Hmm. That makes some amount of sense, I guess, because they probably don't want to have to pay the credit card processing fee more frequently than that. (Some trips on the commuter toll roads in Oklahoma are less than a dollar.)

Now that I think about it, it might actually be favorable for a toll authority if most of their customers have tags from other authorities, since a lot of the admin, credit card processing, and customer service overhead would fall on the other agencies, not them. Most of the interop stuff is likely automated and thus fairly low overhead.

An $8 fee to open an account is sort of a ripoff though.

[Molandfreak]

So they require you to prepay 20 $4 fares to get an account? Hmm. That makes some amount of sense, I guess, because they probably don't want to have to pay the credit card processing fee more frequently than that. (Some trips on the commuter toll roads in Oklahoma are less than a dollar.)

Now that I think about it, it might actually be favorable for a toll authority if most of their customers have tags from other authorities, since a lot of the admin, credit card processing, and customer service overhead would fall on the other agencies, not them. Most of the interop stuff is likely automated and thus fairly low overhead.

An $8 fee to open an account is sort of a ripoff though.

It's $1 per sticker, so it's actually $7 for a processing fee and $1 for a sticker. Still, for most users who will take nowhere near 20 trips across the bridge in the life of their vehicle, it is a huge rip off.

[Jim]

That much up front certainly isn't a way to encourage adoption of your system.  No wonder participation is apparently low.

[Plutonic Panda]

Why on earth would anyone be arguing against just creating a system where there is an electronic tolling gantry that is interoperable with other toll tags? Forget EZ Pass or any other system, just build a gantry that can read all toll tags in is interoperable. What argument is to be made against that?

So far the only thing I've seen that even remotely resembles an argument is that it would cannibalize MacPass(or whatever that is called) but that doesn't make any sense because the money would still be going to the same place. If people that use that specific want to keep using it they can. If other people have their own toll pass, they can just drive through and it will charge them off of that. Maybe add $.10-$.15 fee for doing so.

This probably won't solve all congestion problems this bridge has. But there is no way that it would hurt.

[Scott5114]

So they require you to prepay 20 $4 fares to get an account? Hmm. That makes some amount of sense, I guess, because they probably don't want to have to pay the credit card processing fee more frequently than that. (Some trips on the commuter toll roads in Oklahoma are less than a dollar.)

Now that I think about it, it might actually be favorable for a toll authority if most of their customers have tags from other authorities, since a lot of the admin, credit card processing, and customer service overhead would fall on the other agencies, not them. Most of the interop stuff is likely automated and thus fairly low overhead.

An $8 fee to open an account is sort of a ripoff though.

It's $1 per sticker, so it's actually $7 for a processing fee and $1 for a sticker. Still, for most users who will take nowhere near 20 trips across the bridge in the life of their vehicle, it is a huge rip off.

Oklahoma doesn't charge anything for the setup. You just pay the $40, that goes into your account, and a sticker shows up.

When your toll authority comes out looking bad compared to the outfit that made this and thought this was acceptable well into the 21st century, maybe it should be considered that they have room for improvement.

[SEWIGuy]

Why on earth would anyone be arguing against just creating a system where there is an electronic tolling gantry that is interoperable with other toll tags?

8 pages in and we are still waiting for Flint to give us a good answer to this question. Don't hold your breath.

[Molandfreak]

Why on earth would anyone be arguing against just creating a system where there is an electronic tolling gantry that is interoperable with other toll tags?

8 pages in and we are still waiting for Flint to give us a good answer to this question. Don't hold your breath.

To be completely fair, the arguments against E-ZPass integration would have been a lot more convincing three years ago before MNPass was integrated. I just think Michigan's toll bridges have a lot more reason to integrate than an entirely voluntary HOT lane system that attracts a very specific set of commuters.

[Flint1979]

What the heck are they charging $88 for?

Even OTA only requires $40, and 100% of that is your initial account balance.

$80 of it is the deposit.

[Flint1979]

Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

The way interop agreements usually work would mean anyone with a MacPass would gain the benefit of being able to use it on any road in the E-ZPass zone. So there would not really be "competition" per se (other than to the extent that various flavors of E-ZPass offer different discounts on different facilities).

Now what would be really hilarious is if MacPass snubbed E-ZPass and joined the Pikepass zone instead.

If MacPass was EZPass compatible and I had one then I would be able to use it anywhere EZPass is accepted, I get that. But if it was vice versa then I think the Mackinac Bridge authority would be screwing themselves unless there was some type of agreement where they could become compatible. It's currently $88 for the MacPass with the deposit, the admin fee and the sticker, so if it accepted EZPass someone with EZPass then could just go through there without having to pay the $88.

That is absolutely a potential problem, but it could be mitigated if the MBA offered a discount on tolls to those who bought MacPasses. Or maybe cutting the upfront cost since I have never heard of any other toll agency charging anywhere near $88 for a transponder.

You have to put down an $80 deposit for a MacPass. It's not worth it to get one unless you cross the bridge everyday. If you cross it every day the MacPass costs about $3 a day.

[Rothman]

We don't support EZ Pass because we don't have toll roads. What difference does it make it any of you if Michigan has EZ Pass or not? And how many people on here actually use the Mackinac Bridge? They aren't getting EZ Pass no matter how much people bicker about it. It's not happening.

What difference would it make to you if they did add support for EZ-Pass?  You're so adamant that they shouldn't add it but you haven't given any good reason why not other than "I personally don't like it."  I'm sure there are a couple other old grumpy people that hate change and would be angry that other people would gain the option to just drive through the toll barrier instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4, but I would bet most normal people would be elated, and pick up an EZ-Pass for themselves if they don't already have one (which many Michiganders do).

They aren't going to be adding EZPass so it doesn't make any difference. It's not going to benefit anyone by adding it, first of all they would need to rebuild the toll plaza, secondly it's not going to stop congestion ON the bridge. I'm talking from knowledge not just what I think. People already do drive through the toll plaza instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4 it's called MacPass. Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds to pay a toll and then move on. Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

"Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds" but congestion is a problem.

Claiming that your experience driving over the bridge means that AET or even adding AET lanes and keeping cash lanes would be useless towards mitigating congestion is a non sequitur.

[rhen_var]

As far as I know, nothing is stopping the MBA from phasing out the MacPass and selling their own flavor of EZ-Pass transponders or stickers.  If they're worried about losing money, they could even potentially make more than they do with the MacPass by charging an annual account fee for their version of it like some of the other toll authorities do.

[vdeane]

They aren't going to be adding EZPass so it doesn't make any difference. It's not going to benefit anyone by adding it, first of all they would need to rebuild the toll plaza, secondly it's not going to stop congestion ON the bridge. I'm talking from knowledge not just what I think. People already do drive through the toll plaza instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4 it's called MacPass. Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds to pay a toll and then move on. Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

Why would they need to rebuild the toll plaza to make MacPass and E-ZPass compatible?  Wouldn't they just let E-ZPass users use the existing MacPass lanes and other states would do the reverse?  And what would be "competing"?  Transponders aren't profit centers, at least they're not supposed to be.

[Molandfreak]

As far as I know, nothing is stopping the MBA from phasing out the MacPass and selling their own flavor of EZ-Pass transponders or stickers.  If they're worried about losing money, they could even potentially make more than they do with the MacPass by charging an annual account fee for their version of it like some of the other toll authorities do.

Eesh. If the goal is to bring more users into the system and reduce congestion, adding an annual fee is not the correct way to do that.

[Flint1979]

We don't support EZ Pass because we don't have toll roads. What difference does it make it any of you if Michigan has EZ Pass or not? And how many people on here actually use the Mackinac Bridge? They aren't getting EZ Pass no matter how much people bicker about it. It's not happening.

What difference would it make to you if they did add support for EZ-Pass?  You're so adamant that they shouldn't add it but you haven't given any good reason why not other than "I personally don't like it."  I'm sure there are a couple other old grumpy people that hate change and would be angry that other people would gain the option to just drive through the toll barrier instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4, but I would bet most normal people would be elated, and pick up an EZ-Pass for themselves if they don't already have one (which many Michiganders do).

They aren't going to be adding EZPass so it doesn't make any difference. It's not going to benefit anyone by adding it, first of all they would need to rebuild the toll plaza, secondly it's not going to stop congestion ON the bridge. I'm talking from knowledge not just what I think. People already do drive through the toll plaza instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4 it's called MacPass. Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds to pay a toll and then move on. Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

"Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds" but congestion is a problem.

Claiming that your experience driving over the bridge means that AET or even adding AET lanes and keeping cash lanes would be useless towards mitigating congestion is a non sequitur.

Congestion is a problem because the bridge is two lanes in each direction and almost always has a lane closed for one reason or another. Trucks exceeding 30 tons the speed limit is 20 mph, how is the toll plaza the reason for the congestion? You stop for about 5 seconds and then go at the toll booth. Every time I cross the bridge there is truck traffic holding the flow up. The lack of EZPass is not the reason for congestion on the Mackinac Bridge.

[Flint1979]

They aren't going to be adding EZPass so it doesn't make any difference. It's not going to benefit anyone by adding it, first of all they would need to rebuild the toll plaza, secondly it's not going to stop congestion ON the bridge. I'm talking from knowledge not just what I think. People already do drive through the toll plaza instead of being forced to stop and hand over $4 it's called MacPass. Nobody is upset over having to stop for less than 30 seconds to pay a toll and then move on. Having EZPass on the Mackinac Bridge would compete with their own MacPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't out to screw themselves over.

Why would they need to rebuild the toll plaza to make MacPass and E-ZPass compatible?  Wouldn't they just let E-ZPass users use the existing MacPass lanes and other states would do the reverse?  And what would be "competing"?  Transponders aren't profit centers, at least they're not supposed to be.

They probably could do that. There isn't much room there though.

[vdeane]

Congestion is a problem because the bridge is two lanes in each direction and almost always has a lane closed for one reason or another. Trucks exceeding 30 tons the speed limit is 20 mph, how is the toll plaza the reason for the congestion? You stop for about 5 seconds and then go at the toll booth. Every time I cross the bridge there is truck traffic holding the flow up. The lack of EZPass is not the reason for congestion on the Mackinac Bridge.

As noted upthread, the AADT on the Mac is about 20k.  Assuming traffic triples on peak travel days, and we're looking at around 60k.  Plenty of four-lane roads handle that just fine.  They could stand to raise the truck speed limit, but really, what do you expect to happen if everyone needs to stop for 30 seconds to pay the toll?  That delay adds up.  When you have people stopping, the delay always increases for the car behind, as they need to wait not just 30 seconds to pay the toll, but 30 seconds for everyone ahead of them as well.

The old Williamsville toll barrier on the Thruway was probably comparable to peak days on the Mac.  In the direction that paid cash, it had 7 lanes, 5 cash, two E-ZPass.  So if MacPass and E-ZPass became interoperable, they switched to one-way tolling, and they opened up the "emergency" lanes, we could probably get the same 7 lanes in one direction (I'm assuming we'd need three of the existing ten, including emergency, for the two lanes of the other direction, including shoulders), though I'd only have one MacPass/E-ZPass lane initially until adoption is higher.

[Flint1979]

Congestion is a problem because the bridge is two lanes in each direction and almost always has a lane closed for one reason or another. Trucks exceeding 30 tons the speed limit is 20 mph, how is the toll plaza the reason for the congestion? You stop for about 5 seconds and then go at the toll booth. Every time I cross the bridge there is truck traffic holding the flow up. The lack of EZPass is not the reason for congestion on the Mackinac Bridge.

As noted upthread, the AADT on the Mac is about 20k.  Assuming traffic triples on peak travel days, and we're looking at around 60k.  Plenty of four-lane roads handle that just fine.  They could stand to raise the truck speed limit, but really, what do you expect to happen if everyone needs to stop for 30 seconds to pay the toll?  That delay adds up.  When you have people stopping, the delay always increases for the car behind, as they need to wait not just 30 seconds to pay the toll, but 30 seconds for everyone ahead of them as well.

The old Williamsville toll barrier on the Thruway was probably comparable to peak days on the Mac.  In the direction that paid cash, it had 7 lanes, 5 cash, two E-ZPass.  So if MacPass and E-ZPass became interoperable, they switched to one-way tolling, and they opened up the "emergency" lanes, we could probably get the same 7 lanes in one direction (I'm assuming we'd need three of the existing ten, including emergency, for the two lanes of the other direction, including shoulders), though I'd only have one MacPass/E-ZPass lane initially until adoption is higher.

In 2023 (the last year with full year stats) the Mackinac Bridge had 4,456,148 crossings. That's 12,208 crossings a day, nowhere near the 20,000 you said. The month of July had 638,241 crossings to make July the busiest month at the bridge. That's 20,588 crossings a day in the month of July also nowhere near the 60,000 you said. The Mackinac Bridge has never averaged 60,000 crossings a day not even in a single month. The truck speed limit should stay exactly where it is, you are carrying over 30,000 tons of weight across the bridge why should the truck speed limit be any higher? And it's not 30 seconds, it's about 5 seconds that you are stopped to pay the toll.

[Flint1979]

The highest volume of traffic for a single month over the past 10 years was in July 2021 when 641,696 crossings were made. That is still only 20,699 crossings a day. The bridge doesn't even double from it's yearly average, it comes close but it doesn't even double it let alone triple it.

[Rothman]

The highest volume of traffic for a single month over the past 10 years was in July 2021 when 641,696 crossings were made. That is still only 20,699 crossings a day. The bridge doesn't even double from it's yearly average, it comes close but it doesn't even double it let alone triple it.

To be fair, the tripling I pointed out was using the monthly traffic stats of number of vehicles that cross the bridge...

[Scott5114]

What the heck are they charging $88 for?

Even OTA only requires $40, and 100% of that is your initial account balance.

$80 of it is the deposit.

Why not charge $80 then? Again, OTA can figure out how to not charge an account initiation fee. Is MBA a less capable organization than OTA?

[Plutonic Panda]

Congestion is a problem because the bridge is two lanes in each direction and almost always has a lane closed for one reason or another. Trucks exceeding 30 tons the speed limit is 20 mph, how is the toll plaza the reason for the congestion? You stop for about 5 seconds and then go at the toll booth. Every time I cross the bridge there is truck traffic holding the flow up. The lack of EZPass is not the reason for congestion on the Mackinac Bridge.

As noted upthread, the AADT on the Mac is about 20k.  Assuming traffic triples on peak travel days, and we're looking at around 60k.  Plenty of four-lane roads handle that just fine.  They could stand to raise the truck speed limit, but really, what do you expect to happen if everyone needs to stop for 30 seconds to pay the toll?  That delay adds up.  When you have people stopping, the delay always increases for the car behind, as they need to wait not just 30 seconds to pay the toll, but 30 seconds for everyone ahead of them as well.

The old Williamsville toll barrier on the Thruway was probably comparable to peak days on the Mac.  In the direction that paid cash, it had 7 lanes, 5 cash, two E-ZPass.  So if MacPass and E-ZPass became interoperable, they switched to one-way tolling, and they opened up the "emergency" lanes, we could probably get the same 7 lanes in one direction (I'm assuming we'd need three of the existing ten, including emergency, for the two lanes of the other direction, including shoulders), though I'd only have one MacPass/E-ZPass lane initially until adoption is higher.

In 2023 (the last year with full year stats) the Mackinac Bridge had 4,456,148 crossings. That's 12,208 crossings a day, nowhere near the 20,000 you said. The month of July had 638,241 crossings to make July the busiest month at the bridge. That's 20,588 crossings a day in the month of July also nowhere near the 60,000 you said. The Mackinac Bridge has never averaged 60,000 crossings a day not even in a single month. The truck speed limit should stay exactly where it is, you are carrying over 30,000 tons of weight across the bridge why should the truck speed limit be any higher? And it's not 30 seconds, it's about 5 seconds that you are stopped to pay the toll.

Dude, whatever the case is, You're just trying to find whatever reason you can justify not implementing something that would be a convenience to people using the bridge. You can throw all the numbers you want and tell people their numbers are a little bit off, even though the other person literally said in their post they were just using an example on the extreme end, But you're hyper focused I'm trying to find any reason to not implement electronic tolling that would be interoperable With other tolling tags. At this point it either seems like you're trolling or you're just insane.

Please provide a single valid reason why there should not be an interoperable all electronic tolling system on the Mackinaw bridge.