Catchall topic for news relating to all of the Port Authority crossings.
First item: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/12/16/2-upper-level-lanes-of-gwb-closed-for-emergency-repairs/
The article just glosses over "oh, engineers heard an alarming noise that indicated cracked beams." I would LOVE to find out more about this particularly unsettling concept. Are other beams in danger? What is the nature of the repairs being done? What is this alarming noise? Is it a "ka-thunk" that sounded tinny, or the crunching sound of impending doom?
Quote from: Steve on December 16, 2013, 06:27:15 PM
The article just glosses over "oh, engineers heard an alarming noise that indicated cracked beams." I would LOVE to find out more about this particularly unsettling concept. Are other beams in danger? What is the nature of the repairs being done? What is this alarming noise? Is it a "ka-thunk" that sounded tinny, or the crunching sound of impending doom?
Perhaps a better question might be -
where are all of those toll dollars collected from motorists driving from North Jersey to Manhattan going?
How much of the money is diverted to subsidize the PATH trains?
How much of the money goes to Port Authority real estate deals that have nothing to do with the Port's transportation assets?
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 16, 2013, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 16, 2013, 06:27:15 PM
The article just glosses over "oh, engineers heard an alarming noise that indicated cracked beams." I would LOVE to find out more about this particularly unsettling concept. Are other beams in danger? What is the nature of the repairs being done? What is this alarming noise? Is it a "ka-thunk" that sounded tinny, or the crunching sound of impending doom?
Perhaps a better question might be - where are all of those toll dollars collected from motorists driving from North Jersey to Manhattan going?
How much of the money is diverted to subsidize the PATH trains?
How much of the money goes to Port Authority real estate deals that have nothing to do with the Port's transportation assets?
How much money is going to subsidize the new World Trade Center?
How much is going to wars for cheap gas?
Quote from: NE2 on December 16, 2013, 11:15:13 PM
How much is going to wars for cheap gas?
Not something the Port Authority pays for. Please stay on topic.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 16, 2013, 11:03:55 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 16, 2013, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 16, 2013, 06:27:15 PM
The article just glosses over "oh, engineers heard an alarming noise that indicated cracked beams." I would LOVE to find out more about this particularly unsettling concept. Are other beams in danger? What is the nature of the repairs being done? What is this alarming noise? Is it a "ka-thunk" that sounded tinny, or the crunching sound of impending doom?
Perhaps a better question might be - where are all of those toll dollars collected from motorists driving from North Jersey to Manhattan going?
How much of the money is diverted to subsidize the PATH trains?
How much of the money goes to Port Authority real estate deals that have nothing to do with the Port's transportation assets?
How much money is going to subsidize the new World Trade Center?
The single biggest money sink in the system.
I'll say this, though- I don't know that money
isn't flowing to the crossings to keep them in good shape. When you look at how high the tolls are, and how busy the crossings are, there's a lot of extra money to go around.
Quote from: Steve on December 17, 2013, 12:38:22 AM
The single biggest money sink in the system.
I'll say this, though- I don't know that money isn't flowing to the crossings to keep them in good shape. When you look at how high the tolls are, and how busy the crossings are, there's a lot of extra money to go around.
Aren't the bridge tolls into x part of NYC absurdly high? I remember some bridge having a $15 toll or somewhere around there, but I don't know which bridge it was. With all that money being sucked out of our pockets, I
really want to know where that money is going, because it sure looks like it isn't going to anything that benefits the public.
Quote from: Zeffy on December 17, 2013, 12:44:27 AM
Aren't the bridge tolls into x part of NYC absurdly high? I remember some bridge having a $15 toll or somewhere around there, but I don't know which bridge it was. With all that money being sucked out of our pockets, I really want to know where that money is going, because it sure looks like it isn't going to anything that benefits the public.
High, perhaps–but remember that the toll
into NY is only half what you are charged upon entering. P.A. crossings charge tolls in one direction, so you pay for the round trip upon entering the city.
Quote from: empirestate on December 17, 2013, 01:55:46 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 17, 2013, 12:44:27 AM
Aren't the bridge tolls into x part of NYC absurdly high? I remember some bridge having a $15 toll or somewhere around there, but I don't know which bridge it was. With all that money being sucked out of our pockets, I really want to know where that money is going, because it sure looks like it isn't going to anything that benefits the public.
High, perhaps–but remember that the toll into NY is only half what you are charged upon entering. P.A. crossings charge tolls in one direction, so you pay for the round trip upon entering the city.
Other metropolitan regions charge one-way tolls for their facilities as well and their one-way rates are nowhere near as high.
For comparision purposes; the toll for the four DRPA bridges in the Delaware Valley is $5 one-way and the Boston Harbor tunnels (Sumner & Ted Williams) is $3.50 one-way.
IIRC, that $15 one-way toll is the cash rate that the MTA charges for the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (I-278); a facility that does not cross state lines. The PANYNJ cash tolls rate for their Hudson River crossings is $13 one-way.
Quote from: Steve on December 17, 2013, 12:38:22 AM
[Snipped]
I'll say this, though- I don't know that money isn't flowing to the crossings to keep them in good shape. When you look at how high the tolls are, and how busy the crossings are, there's a lot of extra money to go around.
That, sir, is exactly the point. Even though the GWB has been in operation for a long time, with plenty of truck traffic, it seems (to me) that the Port Authority collects enough
dinero to keep this bridge and the other spans and tunnels in immaculate condition.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 08:46:35 AM
Other metropolitan regions charge one-way tolls for their facilities as well and their one-way rates are nowhere near as high.
MdTA charges $4 (two way tolling) to cross Baltimore Harbor (I-95, I-695 and I-895), though for frequent users, those tolls are
steeply discounted.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 08:46:35 AM
For comparision purposes; the toll for the four DRPA bridges in the Delaware Valley is $5 one-way and the Boston Harbor tunnels (Sumner & Ted Williams) is $3.50 one-way.
Presumably some part of the DRPA toll revenues are diverted to PATCO. I don't know if Massachusetts diverts toll revenue to transit subsidies. Do they?
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 08:46:35 AM
IIRC, that $15 one-way toll is the cash rate that the MTA charges for the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (I-278); a facility that does not cross state lines. The PANYNJ cash tolls rate for their Hudson River crossings is $13 one-way.
We know that the NYMTA diverts millions and millions of dollars from its Bridge and Tunnel customers to subsidize its many (money-losing) transit operations.
For all the talk about how wonderful transit in New York City is (and it is the best in the U.S. in terms of total boardings and modal share), it may also be the most highway- and auto-dependent transit system in the nation.
Quote from: Zeffy on December 17, 2013, 12:44:27 AM
Aren't the bridge tolls into x part of NYC absurdly high? I remember some bridge having a $15 toll or somewhere around there, but I don't know which bridge it was. With all that money being sucked out of our pockets, I really want to know where that money is going, because it sure looks like it isn't going to anything that benefits the public.
For the NYMTA Bridge and Tunnel crossings (all intrastate), the answer is simple: transit subsidies.
Washington Post: For Chris Christie, lane closures at N.J. bridge attract scrutiny if not scandal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-chris-christie-lane-closures-at-nj-bridge-attract-scrutiny-if-not-scandal/2013/12/17/cb1819c4-6698-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html)
TOLLROADSnews: Poorly executed toll lane reallocation trial at Geo Washington Bridge escalates - two top execs of PANYNJ are out in political furorep (http://tollroadsnews.com/news/poorly-executed-toll-lane-reallocation-trial-at-geo-washington-bridge-escalates---two-top-execs-of-panynj-are-out-in-political-furore)
QuoteThe whole sorry affair began, we're told, as a routine move to allocate scarce toll lane capacity better at the main upper level toll plaza and improve flow through the toll plaza and improve travel times.
QuoteWith three lanes in a local entry ramp and motorists in the left lane tending to generate turbulence in much larger flows of traffic from the NJ Turnpike and I-80. Abrupt geometrics at the entry are a legacy from the days when all vehicles stopped fully to pay the toll and there were slow but orderly queues. Nowadays a large proportion of motorists are equipped with E-ZPass electronic toll transponders and they expect to roll through the tolls at 25mph or more, making the uncontrolled merge of three lanes a hazard. So in the morning peak hours it became normal practice to use cones to make all three right hand toll lanes exclusive to local traffic.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:33:10 AMI don't know if Massachusetts diverts toll revenue to transit subsidies. Do they?
All tolled harbor crossings are now handled by MassDOT. The 2 tunnels (3 if one counts the Callahan when it used to be tolled prior to 1983) were originally part of the MTA (Massachusetts Turnpike Authority) and the Tobin (Mystic) Bridge was originally part of MassPort.
While I do not believe that MTA nor MassPort revenue was ever diverted to transit; today, MassDOT's revenue
could be; Roadman can confirm/correct.
Yesterday's incident (actually two separate problems on the outgoing side of the bridge) is the 2nd time lanes had to be closed for emergency work on the George Washington Bridge in the past month.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/12/11/2-outbound-lanes-of-george-washington-bridge-closed-until-morning-for-repairs/
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/11/19/all-lanes-open-after-emergency-repairs-made-to-george-washington-bridge/
Whoever is doing this rehab. on metal plates isn't doing a good job.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 02:17:57 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:33:10 AMI don't know if Massachusetts diverts toll revenue to transit subsidies. Do they?
All tolled harbor crossings are now handled by MassDOT. The 2 tunnels (3 if one counts the Callahan when it used to be tolled prior to 1983) were originally part of the MTA (Massachusetts Turnpike Authority) and the Tobin (Mystic) Bridge was originally part of MassPort.
While I do not believe that MTA nor MassPort revenue was ever diverted to transit; today, MassDOT's revenue could be; Roadman can confirm/correct.
Lets not forget that MassPike spends plenty of toll revenue to pay for the Big Dig.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 08:46:35 AM
Quote from: empirestate on December 17, 2013, 01:55:46 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 17, 2013, 12:44:27 AM
Aren't the bridge tolls into x part of NYC absurdly high? I remember some bridge having a $15 toll or somewhere around there, but I don't know which bridge it was. With all that money being sucked out of our pockets, I really want to know where that money is going, because it sure looks like it isn't going to anything that benefits the public.
High, perhapsbut remember that the toll into NY is only half what you are charged upon entering. P.A. crossings charge tolls in one direction, so you pay for the round trip upon entering the city.
Other metropolitan regions charge one-way tolls for their facilities as well and their one-way rates are nowhere near as high.
For comparision purposes; the toll for the four DRPA bridges in the Delaware Valley is $5 one-way and the Boston Harbor tunnels (Sumner & Ted Williams) is $3.50 one-way.
IIRC, that $15 one-way toll is the cash rate that the MTA charges for the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (I-278); a facility that does not cross state lines. The PANYNJ cash tolls rate for their Hudson River crossings is $13 one-way.
To do a fair comparison though, the E-ZPass rates and/or commuter toll rates need to be examined, and not the cash toll rates. Especially at toll facilities where upwards of 80-90% of users pay electronically, and especially where the vast majority of local residents have a locally issued E-ZPass tag. The $15 toll to enter Staten Island from Brooklyn via the Verrazano Bridge is very high, but few people pay that much (less than 20% I think). The vast majority of occasional users are using a NY-issued E-ZPass, and pay $10.66, and the vast majority of commuters are Staten Island residents paying $6.00. In otherwords, saying "it costs so much to drive back and forth to Staten Island everyday, a $15 toll!" is a bit unfair since regular commuters would never be paying that much.
Delaware River Port Authority: $5.00 (one way) cash, E-ZPass, commuters, everyone
Burlington County Bridge Commission (reasonably close alternate for some S NJ to Philly commuters): $2.00 (one way) cash, E-ZPass, commuters, everyone
Boston Harbor Tunnels (one way toll collection): $3.50 cash/non-MA E-ZPass, $3.00 MA E-ZPass, $0.30 North End/Eastie/Southie residents
Port Authority crossings into Manhattan (one way toll collection): $13 cash, $11 peak E-ZPass (all), $9.00 off-peak E-ZPass
Port Authority crossings into Staten Island (one way toll collection): $13 cash, $11 peak E-ZPass (all), $9.00 off-peak E-ZPass (all), $5.50 NY or NJ E-ZPass with PASI commuter plan (minimum of 3 trips per month, anyone can qualify).
MTA Bridges and Tunnels (one way tolls, each way): $7.50 cash/non-NY E-ZPass, $5.33 NY E-ZPass
Verrazano Narrows Bridge (one way onto Staten Island): $15 cash/non-NY E-ZPass, $10.66 NY E-ZPass, $6.36 Staten Island residents for 1 or 2 trips per month, $6.00 Staten Island residents for 3 or more trips per month.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:25:08 AM
That, sir, is exactly the point. Even though the GWB has been in operation for a long time, with plenty of truck traffic, it seems (to me) that the Port Authority collects enough dinero to keep this bridge and the other spans and tunnels in immaculate condition.
With New York City construction costs? You'd be surprised.
Or, for that matter, with New York City contractor ethics. Quality workmanship is very difficult to come by, especially when as a government agency you are required by law to award every job to the lowest bidder.
Quote from: Duke87 on December 17, 2013, 09:06:47 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:25:08 AM
That, sir, is exactly the point. Even though the GWB has been in operation for a long time, with plenty of truck traffic, it seems (to me) that the Port Authority collects enough dinero to keep this bridge and the other spans and tunnels in immaculate condition.
With New York City construction costs? You'd be surprised.
Yeah, that's correct.
Quote from: Duke87 on December 17, 2013, 09:06:47 PM
Or, for that matter, with New York City contractor ethics. Quality workmanship is very difficult to come by, especially when as a government agency you are required by law to award every job to the lowest bidder.
Harder to define than "lowest responsible bidder," but I think a better approach is "best lifecycle cost" (but I concede that it's much more difficult to define that, especially for repair work. Though on the other hand, I presume and hope that the Port Authority has construction inspectors that look over the work (during and after construction).
The problem with going by who costs the least in the long run rather than who costs the least up front is that determining who that is requires exercising judgment based on the known practices of a bidder in a subjective manner. Which you can't do with government work because then you'll get accused of being unfair or playing favorites.
Besides, any good contractor knows how to find holes in the way a specification is written and make money on change orders to "fix" things whenever the spirit of the spec does not precisely match the letter of the spec. You can't avoid this by not going with the lowest bidder because every bidder will do it. Some may just do it more than others. Agencies battle this by making sure they write extremely detailed specifications. But then doing that takes time and drives the design cost of the job up.
Quote from: mtantillo on December 17, 2013, 06:41:46 PMTo do a fair comparison though, the E-ZPass rates and/or commuter toll rates need to be examined, and not the cash toll rates. Especially at toll facilities where upwards of 80-90% of users pay electronically, and especially where the vast majority of local residents have a locally issued E-ZPass tag.
Mike, my reasoning for only comparing the cash rates was based on simplicity and the fact that most if not all EZ-Pass accounts
now charge an annual fee for their transponders. Depending on who's (agencywise) transponder one has; they may actually pay paying
more than the cash rate if usage such facilities are not part of their normal commute (in short, they seldom use them). Additionally,
not all transponders are elligible for many of the listed discounted EZ-Pass rates. Such restrictions do vary by agency and transponders issued by an outside agency typically get charged the cash rate toll in those
restricted discounted locations. Example: my PTC-issued EZ-Pass will
not receive the discounted EZ-Pass toll rate for the Verrazano.
Either way, most if not all of the disounted EZ-Pass toll rates for the NYC-area facilities are
still higher (in some instances significantly higher) than their Boston or Philly-area counterparts; so my earlier point & comparisons still stands.
Yes, the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority spends much of its toll revenue for the Big Dig;
but at least the I-90 extension (the Ted Williams Tunnel, its toll plaza and the connector tunnel (aka The Liberty Tunnel)) was
part of the Big Dig Project. The main reason why the I-93 portion (the O'Neill Tunnel) wasn't tolled was because Federal law prohibited (and still prohibits IIRC) the tolling of an
existing free Interstate corridor. The waivers allowing such were only a recent development and are thankfully few and far between.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:33:10 AMPresumably some part of the DRPA toll revenues are diverted to PATCO.
While some DPRA bridge toll revenue subsidizes PATCO; the main issue with that agency is that for nearly a decade or two, much of the toll revenue was diverted to
non-transportation-related development projects (examples: the Kimmel Center and the National Constitution Center). Had that not happened (for some reason it's impossible to halt/divert previously allocated development money to where it
should have gone); the bridge tolls wouldn't have needed to be increased to $5 to raise funds for needed repair/improvements
for the bridges themselves. The money to do such would've already been on hand.
Technically, MassDOT could request application of tolls in the O'Neill Tunnel as part of the Value Pricing Pilot Program.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2013, 02:17:57 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:33:10 AMI don't know if Massachusetts diverts toll revenue to transit subsidies. Do they?
All tolled harbor crossings are now handled by MassDOT. The 2 tunnels (3 if one counts the Callahan when it used to be tolled prior to 1983) were originally part of the MTA (Massachusetts Turnpike Authority) and the Tobin (Mystic) Bridge was originally part of MassPort.
While I do not believe that MTA nor MassPort revenue was ever diverted to transit; today, MassDOT's revenue could be; Roadman can confirm/correct.
No Massachusetts Turnpike Authority ** or MassPort toll revenue was ever diverted to transit. Likewise, no MassDOT toll revenue is currently diverted to transit. This is largely because the Boston area's transit system, or MBTA, although overseen by MassDOT in theory, is still an independent agency with its own management structure and board of directors (much like the Turnpike Authority was before it was abolished with the MassDOT merger).
** note that I intentionally spelled out the name because, in Boston speak, MTA also stands for Massachusetts Teachers Association and Metropolitan Transportation Authority (precursor to the current MBTA)
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 18, 2013, 09:19:36 AM
Quote from: mtantillo on December 17, 2013, 06:41:46 PMTo do a fair comparison though, the E-ZPass rates and/or commuter toll rates need to be examined, and not the cash toll rates. Especially at toll facilities where upwards of 80-90% of users pay electronically, and especially where the vast majority of local residents have a locally issued E-ZPass tag.
Mike, my reasoning for only comparing the cash rates was based on simplicity and the fact that most if not all EZ-Pass accounts now charge an annual fee for their transponders. Depending on who's (agencywise) transponder one has; they may actually pay paying more than the cash rate if usage such facilities are not part of their normal commute (in short, they seldom use them). Additionally, not all transponders are elligible for many of the listed discounted EZ-Pass rates. Such restrictions do vary by agency and transponders issued by an outside agency typically get charged the cash rate toll in those restricted discounted locations. Example: my PTC-issued EZ-Pass will not receive the discounted EZ-Pass toll rate for the Verrazano.
Either way, most if not all of the disounted EZ-Pass toll rates for the NYC-area facilities are still higher (in some instances significantly higher) than their Boston or Philly-area counterparts; so my earlier point & comparisons still stands.
Yes, the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority spends much of its toll revenue for the Big Dig; but at least the I-90 extension (the Ted Williams Tunnel, its toll plaza and the connector tunnel (aka The Liberty Tunnel)) was part of the Big Dig Project. The main reason why the I-93 portion (the O'Neill Tunnel) wasn't tolled was because Federal law prohibited (and still prohibits IIRC) the tolling of an existing free Interstate corridor. The waivers allowing such were only a recent development and are thankfully few and far between.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 17, 2013, 09:33:10 AMPresumably some part of the DRPA toll revenues are diverted to PATCO.
While some DPRA bridge toll revenue subsidizes PATCO; the main issue with that agency is that for nearly a decade or two, much of the toll revenue was diverted to non-transportation-related development projects (examples: the Kimmel Center and the National Constitution Center). Had that not happened (for some reason it's impossible to halt/divert previously allocated development money to where it should have gone); the bridge tolls wouldn't have needed to be increased to $5 to raise funds for needed repair/improvements for the bridges themselves. The money to do such would've already been on hand.
The NY agencies are required by law to have no annual fee. Note that the Port Authority is classified as a NJ agency for the purposes of said law (but not for giving transponders to out of state people who register in NY, which is just one of many ways the state likes to screw with people).
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2013, 04:21:00 PMThe NY agencies are required by law to have no annual fee.
However, laws
can change or be repealed.
Once upon a time banks that had ATMs in CT were barred from charging fees to those who used machines that were not owned by their bank (aka foreign ATMs). Then some banks legally challenged CT's fee ban, won and had the ban tossed.
I could easily see a similar legal
stunt maneuver happening w/the NY agencies once more people get
hooked with their transponders in the foreseeable future.
Have you seen Albany lately? They can't pass anything unless it gives them money, and the Thruway, MTA, and Bridge Authority all have separate budgets. Plus, they're also part of the government, so I don't think NY can sue itself. Given that ORT, much less all-electronic, hasn't taken off in most of the state (with the exception of the Henry Hudson Bridge and the Thruway in the Hudson Valley, I don't think a single toll booth has seen a configuration change since E-ZPass was invented - remember, this is the NY no-innovation zone), I'm not sure that they'd be able to push a fee any time in the foreseeable future.
What are the stats on cash tolls collected vs ezpass tolls collected at the panynj crossings ? I'll put the over/under at 72 percent in favor of ezpass.
Quote from: mc78andrew on December 19, 2013, 11:38:55 PM
What are the stats on cash tolls collected vs ezpass tolls collected at the panynj crossings ? I'll put the over/under at 72 percent in favor of ezpass.
Bzzt! Averages 75, gets up to 80-82 during peak weekday hours. source: trust me
Quote from: Steve on December 19, 2013, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: mc78andrew on December 19, 2013, 11:38:55 PM
What are the stats on cash tolls collected vs ezpass tolls collected at the panynj crossings ? I'll put the over/under at 72 percent in favor of ezpass.
Bzzt! Averages 75, gets up to 80-82 during peak weekday hours. source: trust me
Then screw the cash people. Get them with the program that's cheaper to operate or get them off the bridge. Jack the cash rate to 20 bucks.
Quote from: mc78andrew on December 19, 2013, 11:54:27 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 19, 2013, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: mc78andrew on December 19, 2013, 11:38:55 PM
What are the stats on cash tolls collected vs ezpass tolls collected at the panynj crossings ? I'll put the over/under at 72 percent in favor of ezpass.
Bzzt! Averages 75, gets up to 80-82 during peak weekday hours. source: trust me
Then screw the cash people. Get them with the program that's cheaper to operate or get them off the bridge. Jack the cash rate to 20 bucks.
Oh, don't worry, someday we'll look back fondly on the days when tolls began with "1".
Quote from: vdeane on December 19, 2013, 08:26:53 PMThey can't pass anything unless it gives them money
Key point right there in those few words.
While NY can't sue itself. If those NY-based toll agencies can successfully make the case for needing addtional revenue (to convert toll plazas into ORTs for example); you can bet your bottom dollar that some type of user fee for those transponders
will be coming in the horizon.
Let's not forget that when EZ-Pass first started 20 years ago; most agencies charged no fees (if a subscriber opted signed up for automatic replenishment) along with discounted tolls for
all tag-holders. Over time, the NJ Consortium realized that increased tag usage at disounted tolls actually put them in a financial hole. Low & behold, the annual fee ($1/month = $12/year) for
all tagholders was born.
Later on, PTC being one exception, those much-advertised discounted toll rates either disappeared (like it did when DelDOT jacked up their tolls on I-95 to $4
each way several years ago) or became very restricted (local residents and/or committed commuters).
My point is the fee may not currently be allowed to be charged buy the NY agencies; but that can be subject to change.
Of course, NY could impose a fee to their EZ Pass, but the fact that it would require formal legislation, as opposed to the whim of MTA or the Thruway authority.
It's a lot harder to impose the fee.
This is the reason why I have a NY EZ-PASS, even though there were other agencies at the time when I got my EZ-Pass that had no monthly fee, and I believe a lower deposit on the transponder, I reasoned that the fact that state law needed to be changed before a fee would be imposed would insure that I would be adequately warned if such were to occur.
Also, the politicians would have to go on record to support such a change. I don't think we'll see the fee imposed anytime soon in NY.
Quote from: Steve on December 19, 2013, 11:40:41 PM
Bzzt! Averages 75, gets up to 80-82 during peak weekday hours. source: trust me
Aggregate E-ZPass use along the entire NYS Thurway system for October 2013 can be found here (http://www.thruway.ny.gov/about/financial/monthly/2013/vtm/oct2013vtm.pdf) (.pdf document).
MTA seems content to just jack up tolls whenever they want to... NYSTA doesn't race to do upgrades anyways, so they probably won't say anything. I don't know enough about the Bridge Authority to comment there, but note that their booths still have gate arms. I don't think "upgrade" is in their vocabulary. The Peace Bridge tag is for frequent users anyways, and the Niagara River Bridge Commission (joining in 2014) tag will likely be the same. If any authority is likely to get uppity about a fee, it would probably be the Thousand Islands Bridge Authority (joining 2014), as they dragged their feet on E-ZPass for a VERY long time because they don't like the lag in getting to toll payment from the IAG.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 20, 2013, 09:40:58 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 19, 2013, 08:26:53 PMThey can't pass anything unless it gives them money
Key point right there in those few words.
While NY can't sue itself. If those NY-based toll agencies can successfully make the case for needing addtional revenue (to convert toll plazas into ORTs for example); you can bet your bottom dollar that some type of user fee for those transponders will be coming in the horizon.
Let's not forget that when EZ-Pass first started 20 years ago; most agencies charged no fees (if a subscriber opted signed up for automatic replenishment) along with discounted tolls for all tag-holders. Over time, the NJ Consortium realized that increased tag usage at disounted tolls actually put them in a financial hole. Low & behold, the annual fee ($1/month = $12/year) for all tagholders was born.
Later on, PTC being one exception, those much-advertised discounted toll rates either disappeared (like it did when DelDOT jacked up their tolls on I-95 to $4 each way several years ago) or became very restricted (local residents and/or committed commuters).
My point is the fee may not currently be allowed to be charged buy the NY agencies; but that can be subject to change.
Sounds like NJ set the discount rate too low.
Quote from: vdeane on December 20, 2013, 09:23:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 20, 2013, 09:40:58 AMLet's not forget that when EZ-Pass first started 20 years ago; most agencies charged no fees (if a subscriber opted signed up for automatic replenishment) along with discounted tolls for all tag-holders. Over time, the NJ Consortium realized that increased tag usage at disounted tolls actually put them in a financial hole. Low & behold, the annual fee ($1/month = $12/year) for all tagholders was born.
Later on, PTC being one exception, those much-advertised discounted toll rates either disappeared (like it did when DelDOT jacked up their tolls on I-95 to $4 each way several years ago) or became very restricted (local residents and/or committed commuters).
My point is the fee may not currently be allowed to be charged buy the NY agencies; but that can be subject to change.
Sounds like NJ set the discount rate too low.
At the time, tolls on the NJ Turnpike had either just underwent an increase beforehand or shortly after EZ-Pass came about. The discounted NJ Turnpike EZ-Pass toll, back then, was simply the older, pre-increase toll.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 16, 2013, 11:01:47 PM
Perhaps a better question might be - where are all of those toll dollars collected from motorists driving from North Jersey to Manhattan going?
How much of the money is diverted to subsidize the PATH trains?
How much of the money goes to Port Authority real estate deals that have nothing to do with the Port's transportation assets?
Not enough, according to the mantra of the Tri-State (Anti-)Transportation Campaign.
:angry:
Quote from: D-Dey65 on January 03, 2014, 11:19:22 PM
Not enough, according to the mantra of the Tri-State (Anti-)Transportation Campaign.
:angry:
Tri-State
Congestion Campaign.
NJ.COM: Jersey City driver charged with $12K in toll violations (http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2016/04/jersey_city_driver_charged_with_skipping_12k_in_to.html)
QuoteA Jersey City man driving a Mercedes Benz into the Holland Tunnel yesterday has racked up more than $12,000 in EZ Pass toll violations, Port Authority police police said.
QuoteOscar Sanchez, 45, was pulled over after the "toll unpaid" sign flashed as he went through the toll plaza at 3 p.m. yesterday, Port Authority police spokesman Joe Pentangelo said, noting that Sanchez's 2001 Mercedes Benz SL500 did not have a front license plate.
QuotePolice then found that Sanchez's license had been suspended and that he had more than 200 counts of EZ Pass toll evasion amounting to more than $12,000. Sanchez's car was impounded and he was charged with theft of service, operating a vehicle while have a suspended license and having no front license plate.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 03, 2016, 12:19:01 AM
NJ.COM: Jersey City driver charged with $12K in toll violations (http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2016/04/jersey_city_driver_charged_with_skipping_12k_in_to.html)
QuoteA Jersey City man driving a Mercedes Benz into the Holland Tunnel yesterday has racked up more than $12,000 in EZ Pass toll violations, Port Authority police police said.
I knew someone had to be in charge of policing the Port Authority police.