AARoads Forum

While gazing at the YouTubes, I came across a couple of videos that had me scratching my head.

I'll preface this by stating that I've crossed the Mackinac Bridge quite often in the 30 years I've had a driver's license, though *usually* I have the sense to avoid it during holiday weekends.

This is a video from Sunday, July 7th of the narrator attempting to get in line to cross the bridge:


A subsequent video once through the tollbooths:

Clearly, whatever number of toll attendants they had working on Sunday was insufficient. Further complicating matters is that there's a maximum of 8 lanes that can accept tolls, with a maximum of 5 tollbooths in one direction. It was clear weather in ideal conditions. There was no construction restricting throughput on the bridge.

Peak throughput on the Mackinac Bridge (https://www.mackinacbridge.org/fares-traffic/monthly-traffic-statistics/) was in July 2021, when over 640,000 vehicles passed through the tollbooths. July 2023 nearly hit this same figure. This equates to 20,700 vehicles per day.

Assuming the bridge tollbooths were fully staffed up for the entire month, each tollbooth would have to pass nearly 2600 vehicles per day, or 108 vehicles per hour, every hour. In this abstract, this doesn't sound so terrible - one toll every 33 seconds.

Complicating matters:

- The Bridge routinely leaves one lane open for MacPass holders exclusively. I don't know if they do so in maximum congestion situations like what was shown on Sunday; if so, that takes out at least 2 tollbooths of throughput. Assuming traffic in those lanes is negligible, now it's 3,450 vpd through 6 toll booths - 144 vehicles per hour, or 2.4 vehicles per minute per toll booth.

- The reality is that probably 75% of that traffic hit the road between 8am-8pm. Now we're asking 1,300 vehicles per hour to divvy up 6 or 8 tollbooths - 2.7 to 3.6 vehicles per minute per toll booth.

- The vast majority are paying with a credit card. We're asking for a vehicle to roll up, whip out a card, process the card, take the card back, and pull away in 15 to 25 seconds. That's asking a lot.

- I can't guesstimate the % of trips taken at peak times - but this was all assuming equally heavy traffic every day. That's clearly not the case - those nice summer weekends exhibit spikes in traffic. 

After doing some back-of-the-napkin math, it's clear to see that there's room for improvement. Some thoughts:

- Widening the toll plaza to improve throughput during peak times (assuming the cost of said widening pays itself back through more trips over the bridge). Note that this construction would have only about 30-50 days out of the calendar year to pay for itself - the days where traffic warrants use of the additional tollbooths.

- There's space for maybe 6 additional lanes before it starts encroaching on the parking lot for the State Police post. IF we could squeeze 6 additional lanes of throughput, fully staffed up, my throughput numbers look much better - now on peak days I just have to average one transaction per minute per tollbooth.

- Implementing a pay-by-plate or E-Z Pass style solution that travelers are more likely to have (which the Bridge Authority is not doing). There's still the problem of wasting a lane that can't be fully utilized by passing traffic - the % of users still likely lingering in single-digit territory.

- A temporary tollbooth solution for the very heavy days. Problem here is the booth isn't necessarily the major expense - it's the additional concrete apron and associated traffic control, plus the expense of the toll takers needed. Said tollbooths probably aren't going to be weathertight, either.

- Those glorious, glorious toll funds now have to pay for more infrastructure to maintain, and more people on the payroll.

OK, amateur bridge authority types - what's your solution for 8 mile traffic backups in da U.P., eh? You know, besides traveling another day.

I honestly don't see why EZPass couldn't work here as it does in most of the rest of the country.

Absent that, it might make sense to allow a maximum of 6 lanes in one direction instead of 5, assuming there are strong directional flows of northbound before and southbound after the holiday weekends. Even if having just two lanes creates issues in the non-peak direction, it would still ease things up on average and having the flexibility to do so never hurts.

At least the construction on the northern end is done, then.

The solution: put up a gantry and accept E-ZPass! BOOM! PROBLEM SOLVED!

The reason I believe they have not gone with an EZ Pass system, is.. there isn't anything else around that uses it. Michigan doesn't have any toll toads.

They have four toll bridges now, if you count the new Gordie Howe International Bridge. (Ambassador and Detroit Tunnel are private)
• Blue Water Bridge
• International Bridge
• Mackinac Bridge
Are the other three.

Waiting for our resident E-ZPass slammers to come in and tell us we're overreacting to this...

Quote from: Moose on July 10, 2024, 12:08:01 AMThe reason I believe they have not gone with an EZ Pass system, is.. there isn't anything else around that uses it. Michigan doesn't have any toll toads.

They have four toll bridges now, if you count the new Gordie Howe International Bridge. (Ambassador and Detroit Tunnel are private)
• Blue Water Bridge
• International Bridge
• Mackinac Bridge
Are the other three.

Don't forget that Bay City has two former city-owned bridges that are now under the Bay City Bridge Partners, which accepts E-ZPass!

LOL... I'm not surprised at the "just use E-ZPass" responses.

In this scenario, the majority of the E-ZPass users are going to come from out-of-state drivers, or from the same locals who have the MacPass system. Is a once or twice-a-year crossing of the Mighty Mac enough to compel Michigan residents that never leave the state to get an E-ZPass? Probably not.

If they implemented E-ZPass, I'd be shocked if they got 10% of fare revenue from it, and that doesn't really do the trick. You'd need to instead go all-electronic tolling, so nobody has to stop at the tollbooths.
 
Except with AET, the Bridge Authority would have to replace toll collectors with folks collecting on the toll-by-plate fares. A lot of folks will bitch and moan about "not knowing" how it works. A lot of collection agencies will get fat, a lot of credit scores will plummet, and the Mackinac Bridge receives a black eye for turning a simple cash transaction into something much more complicated.
 
Maybe some idiot legislator proposes scrapping the tolls altogether. (https://www.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/15ngr6t/new_bill_would_eliminate_toll_for_drivers/) Wait, that happened without AET. Oh well...

Quote from: webny99 on July 09, 2024, 11:05:40 PMAbsent that, it might make sense to allow a maximum of 6 lanes in one direction instead of 5, assuming there are strong directional flows of northbound before and southbound after the holiday weekends. Even if having just two lanes creates issues in the non-peak direction, it would still ease things up on average and having the flexibility to do so never hurts.

That's certainly an option. If you watched the videos from Sunday, though, you'll note the 2+ mile NBD backup that complemented the epic SBD backups. At some point, they simply need more lanes.

E-ZPass or not, the idea thst you should expand the toll plaza in modern times when AET is wholly feasible is ridiculous if backups are the problem you're trying to solve.

One only needs to look at the history of the Williamsville barrier on the Thruway and the Sturbridge toll plaza on the MassPike to see that the evolution to AET should be considered inevitable and investing in the ROW to add lanes and then toll taker salaries/benefits is a long-term waste.  If they were short-staffed in the video, adding lanes won't fix that issue.

Why can't they use pay by plate and get rid of the toll attendants altogether?

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on July 10, 2024, 12:36:56 AM

Quote from: Moose on July 10, 2024, 12:08:01 AMThe reason I believe they have not gone with an EZ Pass system, is.. there isn't anything else around that uses it. Michigan doesn't have any toll toads.

They have four toll bridges now, if you count the new Gordie Howe International Bridge. (Ambassador and Detroit Tunnel are private)
• Blue Water Bridge
• International Bridge
• Mackinac Bridge
Are the other three.

Don't forget that Bay City has two former city-owned bridges that are now under the Bay City Bridge Partners, which accepts E-ZPass!

Just the Liberty Bridge is tolled right now and many people avoid it.

How often do these backups actually happen?  If it's a recurring thing, then that's something to consider.  But if it's only happening a handful of holidays a year, then expanding the toll plaza isn't very cost-effective.

Pay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 10, 2024, 02:35:46 AMLOL... I'm not surprised at the "just use E-ZPass" responses.

In this scenario, the majority of the E-ZPass users are going to come from out-of-state drivers, or from the same locals who have the MacPass system. Is a once or twice-a-year crossing of the Mighty Mac enough to compel Michigan residents that never leave the state to get an E-ZPass? Probably not.

So? It improves the lives of some people who may make use of both systems. MNPass is even further away from another E-ZPass location, but I was overjoyed at the prospect of not having to have a separate transponder to travel in the east. Separating toll systems helps no one.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 10, 2024, 02:35:46 AMLOL... I'm not surprised at the "just use E-ZPass" responses.

In this scenario, the majority of the E-ZPass users are going to come from out-of-state drivers, or from the same locals who have the MacPass system. Is a once or twice-a-year crossing of the Mighty Mac enough to compel Michigan residents that never leave the state to get an E-ZPass? Probably not.

If they implemented E-ZPass, I'd be shocked if they got 10% of fare revenue from it, and that doesn't really do the trick. You'd need to instead go all-electronic tolling, so nobody has to stop at the tollbooths.
 
Except with AET, the Bridge Authority would have to replace toll collectors with folks collecting on the toll-by-plate fares. A lot of folks will bitch and moan about "not knowing" how it works. A lot of collection agencies will get fat, a lot of credit scores will plummet, and the Mackinac Bridge receives a black eye for turning a simple cash transaction into something much more complicated.

I have to push back a bit that EZPass wouldn't make a difference and that hardly anyone would use it. If the once or twice a year travelers are the ones that wouldn't get it, remember they're also the ones that all travel on the same weekends and cause the backups. If EZPass was accepted, their options would be:
(a) get EZPass if they want to avoid the backups,
(b) let the regulars, out-of-staters, and enough others get EZPass that it helps reduce congestion and deal with the lessened delays, or
(c) travel on a different day or at a different time of day, which is also an option currently.

That sounds to me like a much better array of options than what exists currently, which is to just expect backups at peak times and deal with it... and that's just for the people who cross infrequently. More frequent users, like locals or weekend travelers, would find EZPass to be a major time and hassle saver for all of their crossings, even when there's no backups. And I think it would end up being significantly higher than 10% of people that use it, even if it took some time to get there. Granted, I know Michigan doesn't have a state toll road, but the Thruway processes almost 90% of their transactions through EZPass, and that's largely through marketing and drivers eventually realizing the convenience and time savings.

It's also worth mentioning that EZPass would help reduce the "snowball effect" of existing delays piling up by allowing for more efficient clearing of the toll booth, which in turn allows traffic behind them to reach the toll booth faster and prevent backups from spiraling out of control.

Quote from: webny99 on July 10, 2024, 10:46:40 AM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 10, 2024, 02:35:46 AMLOL... I'm not surprised at the "just use E-ZPass" responses.

In this scenario, the majority of the E-ZPass users are going to come from out-of-state drivers, or from the same locals who have the MacPass system. Is a once or twice-a-year crossing of the Mighty Mac enough to compel Michigan residents that never leave the state to get an E-ZPass? Probably not.

If they implemented E-ZPass, I'd be shocked if they got 10% of fare revenue from it, and that doesn't really do the trick. You'd need to instead go all-electronic tolling, so nobody has to stop at the tollbooths.
 
Except with AET, the Bridge Authority would have to replace toll collectors with folks collecting on the toll-by-plate fares. A lot of folks will bitch and moan about "not knowing" how it works. A lot of collection agencies will get fat, a lot of credit scores will plummet, and the Mackinac Bridge receives a black eye for turning a simple cash transaction into something much more complicated.

I have to push back a bit that EZPass wouldn't make a difference and that hardly anyone would use it. If the once or twice a year travelers are the ones that wouldn't get it, remember they're also the ones that all travel on the same weekends and cause the backups. If EZPass was accepted, their options would be:
(a) get EZPass if they want to avoid the backups,
(b) let the regulars, out-of-staters, and enough others get EZPass that it helps reduce congestion and deal with the lessened delays, or
(c) travel on a different day or at a different time of day, which is also an option currently.

That sounds to me like a much better array of options than what exists currently, which is to just expect backups at peak times and deal with it... and that's just for the people who cross infrequently. More frequent users, like locals or weekend travelers, would find EZPass to be a major time and hassle saver for all of their crossings, even when there's no backups. And I think it would end up being significantly higher than 10% of people that use it, even if it took some time to get there. Granted, I know Michigan doesn't have a state toll road, but the Thruway processes almost 90% of their transactions through EZPass, and that's largely through marketing and drivers eventually realizing the convenience and time savings.

It's also worth mentioning that EZPass would help reduce the "snowball effect" of existing delays piling up by allowing for more efficient clearing of the toll booth, which in turn allows traffic behind them to reach the toll booth faster and prevent backups from spiraling out of control.

Exactly. Plus the added utility would likely result in a much greater amount of MacPass/EZPass users. And 10% of users still means the line will be 10% shorter.

Quote from: webny99 on July 10, 2024, 10:46:40 AMlet the regulars, out-of-staters, and enough others get EZPass that it helps reduce congestion and deal with the lessened delays

But the 2 lanes on the bridge don't widen out into the multiple toll booth lanes until you're actually on land. Maybe 1/10 or 1/8 of a mile from the bridge itself to the plaza. Unless you get a significant number of cars using an EZPass system, you'll still have a large number of vehicles backing up onto the bridge.

The real power of E-ZPass is that it's used all over the place.  While it would be nice to have MacPass become interoperable, Michigan wouldn't get the full utility of it unless the international bridges join up too.  IMO they should; it's silly that all of these toll facilities in the same state have transponders, but none of them are interoperable with each other.  And every bordering jurisdiction that has toll facilities has at least one that takes E-ZPass, even Ontario (Peace Bridge, Niagara Falls bridges, and the Thousand Islands Bridge - the latter of which can be crossed from the mainland to Hill Island without leaving Canada).

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on July 10, 2024, 12:36:56 AMDon't forget that Bay City has two former city-owned bridges that are now under the Bay City Bridge Partners, which accepts E-ZPass!

Interesting... that's a bit of irony, with the two bridges in Michigan that accept E-ZPass also being the two that people with E-ZPass are the least likely to use!

Quote from: froggie on July 10, 2024, 09:57:21 AMHow often do these backups actually happen?  If it's a recurring thing, then that's something to consider.  But if it's only happening a handful of holidays a year, then expanding the toll plaza isn't very cost-effective.

With this thought, also keep in mind southbound from the toll plaza you're trying to rapidly funnel a bunch of traffic onto a nearly 60-year old non-Interstate standard bridge.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 10, 2024, 09:25:32 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 10, 2024, 09:57:21 AMHow often do these backups actually happen?  If it's a recurring thing, then that's something to consider.  But if it's only happening a handful of holidays a year, then expanding the toll plaza isn't very cost-effective.

With this thought, also keep in mind southbound from the toll plaza you're trying to rapidly funnel a bunch of traffic onto a nearly 60-year old non-Interstate standard bridge.

You mean nearly 70? It celebrated it's 60th birthday in 2017.

Quote from: GaryV on July 10, 2024, 11:38:25 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 10, 2024, 10:46:40 AMlet the regulars, out-of-staters, and enough others get EZPass that it helps reduce congestion and deal with the lessened delays

But the 2 lanes on the bridge don't widen out into the multiple toll booth lanes until you're actually on land. Maybe 1/10 or 1/8 of a mile from the bridge itself to the plaza. Unless you get a significant number of cars using an EZPass system, you'll still have a large number of vehicles backing up onto the bridge.

From my experience with the old Thruway toll booths which were pretty similar configuration-wise, backups may still occur but they tend to move faster when they do occur, since anyone with EZPass can shift into the designated lane(s) and keep moving at ~20 mph as soon as it widens out. At the major toll barriers the Thruway would often have an EZPass lane on both sides with the cash lanes in the center, but either side would work as long as it was well signed in advance.

But of course there's no way around the fact that the improvement in traffic flow is still relative to how many people use it. Interestingly enough, by the end of the physical toll barrier era in NY, so many people had EZPass that you could often get ahead by using an open cash lane. Even though you had to come to a stop that way, it was still faster if there was a long lineup forming for the EZPass lane. Of course, I don't foresee that happening at the Mackinac Bridge anytime soon - at that point, miles-long backups are no longer even a concern.

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

And if they go to Pay-by-plate without EZ-Pass.
You going to get people who get an bill in the mail calling the local EZ-pass agency about the bill and if that says don't pay it's an error then what about the late and other fees?

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

You've not driven on open-road tolled facilities before? You either pay with EZ-Pass or with a pay-by-plate model. If you obscure your plates, or if you fail to pay your bill, you are a scofflaw. A deadbeat.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 10, 2024, 09:38:05 PM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 10, 2024, 09:25:32 PMWith this thought, also keep in mind southbound from the toll plaza you're trying to rapidly funnel a bunch of traffic onto a nearly 60-year old non-Interstate standard bridge.

You mean nearly 70? It celebrated it's 60th birthday in 2017.

Well, 66 is near both 60 and 70.  :-D

Quote from: seicer on July 11, 2024, 03:30:18 PMYou've not driven on open-road tolled facilities before? You either pay with EZ-Pass or with a pay-by-plate model. If you obscure your plates, or if you fail to pay your bill, you are a scofflaw. A deadbeat.

What part of 500 mile detour didn't resonate here?

I have, near me, I-90 (MA), Everett Turnpike (NH), and I-95 (NH) as tolled highways, and I can avoid them with US 20, US 3, and US 1 respectively. I have a choice.

The Mackinac tolls are not a choice. It's heavy handed to expect governments of a foreign nation to give their drivers info out to collect tolls. This is a bridge where the example of having tolls taken on location are likely a smarter operation.

Oh no! Tolls on a bridge! It's not as if there aren't tolls on other crossings in the United States (and world) where detours are many miles long. I'm sure you'll survive paying a few dollars or having your plate read (and billed).

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 10, 2024, 09:25:32 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 10, 2024, 09:57:21 AMHow often do these backups actually happen?  If it's a recurring thing, then that's something to consider.  But if it's only happening a handful of holidays a year, then expanding the toll plaza isn't very cost-effective.

With this thought, also keep in mind southbound from the toll plaza you're trying to rapidly funnel a bunch of traffic onto a nearly 60-year old non-Interstate standard bridge.

My guesstimate (since I couldn't find statistics for this) is maybe 15 or 20 days out of the year. Obviously Memorial Day, the 4th, and Labor Day are big weekends. Judging by the numbers the Bridge Authority posts, peak months are in July and August. May-October sees 2/3 of the yearly traffic on the Bridge.

Bridge capacity is not an issue. On peak days AADT is about 20,000 vpd (vehicles per day), which is fairly light traffic levels for a 4-lane freeway. Your issue would instead be with northbound coming off the bridge, which has only a short distance for cars to funnel into the correct lane to take their toll.

E-ZPass does you no good if the backups are long enough to back up onto the causeway with non E-ZPass holders. They could try posting signage for non E-ZPass to keep right, but at some point folks who don't get the memo will clog up the roadway anyway. Ultimately, it's not going to be an E-ZPass solution alone - it would have to be combined with AET to really solve the congestion problem.

It would also require higher tolls on at least the pay-by-mail travelers, to the wailing and gnashing of teeth of those who paid hundreds of dollars in fuel to lug their motorhomes and travel trailers north. "Oh noes! We have to pay $20 now to cross the bridge, EACH WAY!"

Quote from: SectorZ on July 11, 2024, 10:54:43 AM

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

Only 500 miles? It's about 900 miles to drive around the lake.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2024, 01:13:32 AM

Quote from: SectorZ on July 11, 2024, 10:54:43 AM

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

Only 500 miles? It's about 900 miles to drive around the lake.

Fair enough, I was just trying to post a number I didn't think was hyperbole without checking. Just drives my point home that much more.

Quote from: SectorZ on July 12, 2024, 09:19:00 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2024, 01:13:32 AM

Quote from: SectorZ on July 11, 2024, 10:54:43 AM

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

Only 500 miles? It's about 900 miles to drive around the lake.

Fair enough, I was just trying to post a number I didn't think was hyperbole without checking. Just drives my point home that much more.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and thought you were taking the SS Badger across the lake.

I know this sounds crazy but what if there was a twin span built? You then can have both bridges be 3 thru lanes and with a right shoulder. Would spending $828 million (what it cost the original span in 2023 equal money) be worth it? Have the old span be Southbound and the new span be Northbound. You then could have the current plaza just for southbound and build the new plaza on the new bridge north of Huron St in Mackinaw City.

Not the exact same scenario, but there are two other similar entities with long, rural crossings with few (or lengthy) alternatives that I would put in the same "peer group" as the Mackinac Bridge:  the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (CBBT) and the Confederation Bridge.

Both facilities have an ETC option (EZPass for the CBBT and "StraitPASS" for the Confederation Bridge) while also having cash lanes.  The Confederation Bridge has a single toll plaza and only charges in one direction (leaving PEI), while the CBBT has toll plazas on each side, charging users before they begin the crossing.

So two theoretical possibilities that could be options for the Mackinac.  First option would be to charge double the toll but to only charge it southbound since the toll plaza is on the Upper Peninsula.  The existing toll plaza could probably be reconfigured to provide two free-flowing northbound lanes while providing both an ETC lane and additional cash lanes southbound.

The second option, which IMO would be the better option operationally but also more problematic to implement, would be to build a second toll plaza on the Mackinaw City side for northbound traffic.  The problem here is that you have the town completely surrounding the southern approach to the bridge (plus the proximity of Exits 338 and 339) so adequate space is tight.  One possibility would be to buy out the Marathon station and Mystery Town USA and use that space for the plaza, but that would require a lot of earth given the elevation difference.  This would also require removing the northbound ramps at Exit 339.

(EDIT) In response to hobsini's post right before mine, building a second span would be wasted money.  As noted upthread, even on the busiest holidays, capacity on the bridge itself is not the issue.  I also don't think building a toll plaza on the bridge itself would be the right way to go...it would be even more expensive than the ROW buyout and earth moving I suggested.

Quote from: SectorZ on July 12, 2024, 09:19:00 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2024, 01:13:32 AM

Quote from: SectorZ on July 11, 2024, 10:54:43 AM

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

Only 500 miles? It's about 900 miles to drive around the lake.

Fair enough, I was just trying to post a number I didn't think was hyperbole without checking. Just drives my point home that much more.

I did the Lake Michigan Circle Tour one time so I knew how long it was.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 12, 2024, 09:23:11 AM

Quote from: SectorZ on July 12, 2024, 09:19:00 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2024, 01:13:32 AM

Quote from: SectorZ on July 11, 2024, 10:54:43 AM

Quote from: seicer on July 10, 2024, 10:09:32 AMPay-by-plate/EZ-Pass is the best solution for these types of situations. Michigan should already have agreements with surrounding states and provinces to collect tolls from scofflaws.

How is someone a scofflaw when the only way to avoid the tolled bridge involves a 500 mile detour? They supposed to ford the Mackinac Strait or something?

Really don't think calling people deadbeats when this is literally the only transportation choice they have makes a ton of sense.

Only 500 miles? It's about 900 miles to drive around the lake.

Fair enough, I was just trying to post a number I didn't think was hyperbole without checking. Just drives my point home that much more.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and thought you were taking the SS Badger across the lake.

Yeah that would shorten it by about 350 miles or so. I looked on Google and it would take about two more hours to drive around the lake vs. taking the SS Badger.

Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2024, 10:01:59 AMFirst option would be to charge double the toll but to only charge it southbound since the toll plaza is on the Upper Peninsula.  The existing toll plaza could probably be reconfigured to provide two free-flowing northbound lanes while providing both an ETC lane and additional cash lanes southbound.

This might ultimately be the answer. They would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case. Folks from the U.P. would effectively pre-pay their return trip, and the "Trolls" - the ones who live "under the bridge", pay up leaving the U.P.  The tolls are far cheaper than other ways to get over or around the lake, so being a toll scofflaw doesn't get you anywhere.

Not having backups to get into the U.P. would be a boon to encouraging more U.P. tourism, and devoting all tollbooths to SBD traffic would dramatically improve throughput. More throughput = more toll revenue. 

Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2024, 10:01:59 AMThe second option, which IMO would be the better option operationally but also more problematic to implement, would be to build a second toll plaza on the Mackinaw City side for northbound traffic.  The problem here is that you have the town completely surrounding the southern approach to the bridge (plus the proximity of Exits 338 and 339) so adequate space is tight. 

As light as traffic is on the bridge for the vast majority of the year, the expense of running a 2nd set of toll booths and the eminent domain needed to construct the booths would be wasted, let alone constructing a twin span. You also have the grounds of the historical Fort Michilimackinac that would be impacted.

If I was on the Bridge board, I would take my chances with collecting tolls for southbound only, or going AET, long before I'd consider new tollbooths in Mackinac City. 

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

Funny enough, the two times I've crossed the Mackinac were both northbound only. Once in 2013 for a trip to Northern Ontario (returned home heading south from Sudbury) and once in 2017 (flew back home from Winnipeg to Hamilton).

Question for those against EZPass on the bridge: What makes the MacPass better? Wouldn't you rather have a transponder that works on other tolls too?

(I would be thrilled if the 407 adopted EZPass, but it'll never happen).

Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2024, 03:16:16 PM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

Funny enough, the two times I've crossed the Mackinac were both northbound only. Once in 2013 for a trip to Northern Ontario (returned home heading south from Sudbury) and once in 2017 (flew back home from Winnipeg to Hamilton).

I've crossed twice. First time was northbound in 1999. Second time was southbound in 2023.

My only crossing in 2003 was northbound.  For some reason, my long trips to the Midwest and beyond, including that 2003 trip that went as far out as Yellowstone, have been much more often gone westbound on a more northerly route and back eastbound on a more southerly route.

I don't understand why going to all electronic tolling isn't the obvious fix here.  There will be some people grumbling that they don't use the bridge often enough to justify a transponder.  Well, in that case, the higher toll for a toll-by-plate approach for those without transponders isn't going to hit you very often.

I've only ever crossed northbound (2005, 2013, 2021). I was in St. Ignace last year on a day trip from Marquette, but did not cross probably because I didn't feel like paying the toll twice.

Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2024, 03:18:13 PMQuestion for those against EZPass on the bridge: What makes the MacPass better? Wouldn't you rather have a transponder that works on other tolls too?

(I would be thrilled if the 407 adopted EZPass, but it'll never happen).

Yeah, the 407 is the worst in this regard. They even charge monthly user fees for their transponders. The Mackinac Bridge Authority isn't that greedy with MacPasses, they just charge $87 to set up an account--$80 of which is a direct deposit towards tolls--but that just isn't worth it for occasional vacationers from the LP. Introduce EZPass compatibility, and suddenly that $87 becomes a lot more enticing. They could offer a discounted rate for those who purchased a pass through the MBA rather than other agencies in order to keep the small revenue stream they have from this.

Would it be feasible to close the Jamet Street exits, build an exit to Central Avenue or Cadillac Street instead, then utilize the additional ROW from the former Jamet Street exit to install northbound toll lanes there?

Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2024, 03:18:13 PMQuestion for those against EZPass on the bridge: What makes the MacPass better? Wouldn't you rather have a transponder that works on other tolls too?

(I would be thrilled if the 407 adopted EZPass, but it'll never happen).

That is an interesting question.  It seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 08:33:08 PMIntroduce EZPass compatibility, and suddenly that $87 becomes a lot more enticing.

Or not.  $87 is a LOT more than what any state charges to set up E-ZPass.  I believe Virginia (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Transportation_Systems_Casebook/Tolling/E-ZPass#Fees_and_discounts_by_state) is the highest for regular drivers at $35.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 09:06:50 PMWould it be feasible to close the Jamet Street exits, build an exit to Central Avenue or Cadillac Street instead, then utilize the additional ROW from the former Jamet Street exit to install northbound toll lanes there?

I thought about that, but I don't think that's doable.  Using the existing toll plaza as a guide, you would need a space approximately 200ft x 600ft for the plaza itself and the approach lanes.  That does not include the headquarters building, state police station, or employee parking...those would all be extra.  You would also need tapers on either side.

There's 200ft of width right at Jamet, but thanks to the compactness of that interchange plus the mainline being at a slight angle to the local street grid, you don't have that width on either side of Jamet.  Something else would have to be taken...which due to the proximity of Nicolet St and a park on the east side would most likely be the I-75 Plaza but also possibly the Hampton Inn Express.

Quote from: vdeane on July 12, 2024, 10:16:23 PM

Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2024, 03:18:13 PMQuestion for those against EZPass on the bridge: What makes the MacPass better? Wouldn't you rather have a transponder that works on other tolls too?

(I would be thrilled if the 407 adopted EZPass, but it'll never happen).

That is an interesting question.  It seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2024, 10:01:59 AMFirst option would be to charge double the toll but to only charge it southbound since the toll plaza is on the Upper Peninsula.  The existing toll plaza could probably be reconfigured to provide two free-flowing northbound lanes while providing both an ETC lane and additional cash lanes southbound.

This might ultimately be the answer. They would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case. Folks from the U.P. would effectively pre-pay their return trip, and the "Trolls" - the ones who live "under the bridge", pay up leaving the U.P.  The tolls are far cheaper than other ways to get over or around the lake, so being a toll scofflaw doesn't get you anywhere.

Not having backups to get into the U.P. would be a boon to encouraging more U.P. tourism, and devoting all tollbooths to SBD traffic would dramatically improve throughput. More throughput = more toll revenue.

Did you miss the part of the OP's videos showing US-2 backed up for miles in the "southbound" direction?

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

No.

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

So it's about refusing to accept/implement some of the conveniences of the modern world just to prove a point? Why doesn't the entire state just convert to a Mennonite community?

Quote from: GaryV on July 12, 2024, 11:09:41 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2024, 10:01:59 AMFirst option would be to charge double the toll but to only charge it southbound since the toll plaza is on the Upper Peninsula.  The existing toll plaza could probably be reconfigured to provide two free-flowing northbound lanes while providing both an ETC lane and additional cash lanes southbound.

This might ultimately be the answer. They would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case. Folks from the U.P. would effectively pre-pay their return trip, and the "Trolls" - the ones who live "under the bridge", pay up leaving the U.P.  The tolls are far cheaper than other ways to get over or around the lake, so being a toll scofflaw doesn't get you anywhere.

Not having backups to get into the U.P. would be a boon to encouraging more U.P. tourism, and devoting all tollbooths to SBD traffic would dramatically improve throughput. More throughput = more toll revenue.

Did you miss the part of the OP's videos showing US-2 backed up for miles in the "southbound" direction?

Did you miss the part where I mentioned making the existing toll southbound only would enable them to reconfigure the toll plaza to have more southbound lanes?

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

Every state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan.

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 13, 2024, 09:56:59 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Going all the way west to Ironwood seems out of the way.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 10:42:07 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 13, 2024, 09:56:59 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Going all the way west to Ironwood seems out of the way.

Psst.  This is the AARoads forum...

Quote from: Rothman on July 13, 2024, 11:14:10 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 10:42:07 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 13, 2024, 09:56:59 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Going all the way west to Ironwood seems out of the way.

Psst.  This is the AARoads forum...

He said he "had" to drive that way.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 11:50:25 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 13, 2024, 11:14:10 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 10:42:07 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 13, 2024, 09:56:59 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Going all the way west to Ironwood seems out of the way.

Psst.  This is the AARoads forum...

He said he "had" to drive that way.

Psst.  This is the AARoads forum...

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2024, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PMI don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

No.

What a great value add to the conversation. Thank you for your insight.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 01:48:13 AMSo it's about refusing to accept/implement some of the conveniences of the modern world just to prove a point? Why doesn't the entire state just convert to a Mennonite community?

Tolling is one of the conveniences of the modern world?

Seems a strange hill to die on; but to each, his own.

Quote from: KelleyCook on July 13, 2024, 02:50:56 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 01:48:13 AMSo it's about refusing to accept/implement some of the conveniences of the modern world just to prove a point? Why doesn't the entire state just convert to a Mennonite community?

Tolling is one of the conveniences of the modern world?

Seems a strange hill to die on; but to each, his own.

Tell me you didn't understand the point without telling me you didn't understand the point. If they could make the Mac free to cross, that would obviously be the best option. However, since that will never happen, implementing a toll-by-plate system and beginning to accept E-ZPass would be the next best option. Because that improves the lives of people by not forcing them to stop at a toll booth during peak traffic. It's completely insane to say that stopping at a toll booth adds to your quality of life, which is the implication being made here.

Quote from: GaryV on July 12, 2024, 11:09:41 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 12, 2024, 10:01:59 AMFirst option would be to charge double the toll but to only charge it southbound since the toll plaza is on the Upper Peninsula.  The existing toll plaza could probably be reconfigured to provide two free-flowing northbound lanes while providing both an ETC lane and additional cash lanes southbound.

This might ultimately be the answer. They would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case. Folks from the U.P. would effectively pre-pay their return trip, and the "Trolls" - the ones who live "under the bridge", pay up leaving the U.P.  The tolls are far cheaper than other ways to get over or around the lake, so being a toll scofflaw doesn't get you anywhere.

Not having backups to get into the U.P. would be a boon to encouraging more U.P. tourism, and devoting all tollbooths to SBD traffic would dramatically improve throughput. More throughput = more toll revenue.

Did you miss the part of the OP's videos showing US-2 backed up for miles in the "southbound" direction?

I opened this topic! That video is why we're having this discussion!

My concern isn't specifically that there's a backup for southbound traffic - it's that there's backups at all for a bridge that is wide enough to handle all the traffic thrown at it. Having backups of several miles in each direction points to an inability to keep the traffic flowing.

Those epic backups definitely go both ways; NBD has been known to back up beyond Mackinac City and sometimes beyond the US-31 interchange on really bad days. They're only occasional backups, but they're at the times of year that the U.P. needs to be able to cash in on the tourist traffic. If folks end up avoiding the area because of hours-long waits to cross the bridge, that's bad for everyone.

My goal was to kick around ideas to boost the throughput of the toll taking operation itself, to minimize backups on the busy days. Ultimately, it's to get those tourist dollars to the U.P. and to improve the lives of those who make their home in the U.P. This would also bring more money into the Bridge Authority coffers so that the existing Mackinac Bridge remains in good condition, the tolls themselves can stay at reasonable levels, and that the Authority is able to fund a 2nd or replacement span if and when that becomes necessary.

Again, since this is only an issue maybe 30 days out of the year, major infrastructure changes aren't necessarily needed or feasible. But on those days, they need to figure out how to keep that traffic moving!

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2024, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

No.

I think it's fair.  Remember all the comments the last time this came up that could be summed up as "we have a slower-paced lifestyle here" and "why are you in such a hurry?"?

Quote from: vdeane on July 13, 2024, 04:34:16 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2024, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 12, 2024, 11:04:04 PM

QuoteIt seems like it's in large part a desire to preserve a slower pace of life where you stop, wait in line, and then pay in cash (aside from the locals for whom MacPass actually makes sense) and to distance themselves, at least psychologically, from "toll road country" (note that there have also been many who are passionate about MI using "fare" instead of "toll" on signs).  This may be a broader regional trend, because E-ZPass usage is lower than in the Northeast, even along the toll road corridors.  Even in NY, E-ZPass utilization was lower around Buffalo than anywhere else in the state, despite the fact that the Thruway is needed there just to get to some of the suburbs on a freeway.  And Ohio was very late to adopting E-ZPass or even any transponder at all, even though, unlike Michigan, they "have a toll road".  Indiana doesn't even have ORT lanes.  Illinois seems to be the main exception.  So it definitely seems like there's something cultural going on.

That's silly. I feel no more connected to Illinois and points east by virtue of being in a state utilizing E-ZPass than I did before that switch was made. It's simply much more convenient for me not to have a separate account since I also visit Illinois often.

I don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

No.

I think it's fair.  Remember all the comments the last time this came up that could be summed up as "we have a slower-paced lifestyle here" and "why are you in such a hurry?"?

Sure, but luddism should never be justified.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 10:42:07 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 13, 2024, 09:56:59 AM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 02:49:00 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 12, 2024, 02:39:51 PMThey would lose out on funds from anyone going northbound only, but that's not a particularly common use case.

I would think that's pretty rare, and even when it does occur, it should be close to a wash with those using the bridge southbound only.

Ironically, I've used the Mackinac bridge southbound only twice - both times returning from the Upper Midwest on trips when we had gone through Chicagoland on the outbound trip. So we would have essentially paid double if a southbound only toll was in place, but that barely even registers in the overall trip cost on a trip of that length.

I've used the Mackinac Bridge Northbound only before but I was driving so far west in the U.P. and then down to Madison, Wisconsin so it made sense to go back to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan via Chicago. I had to drive from Houghton to Ontonagon to Ironwood then Madison, WI.

Going all the way west to Ironwood seems out of the way.

It is out of the way if you're just driving along the lakeshore but I had to pick things up and drop them off along the way so I had to hit those towns but I wouldn't have gone to Ironwood if I didn't have to. It's the only time I have been to Ironwood now that I think of it too.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 02:57:26 PM

Quote from: KelleyCook on July 13, 2024, 02:50:56 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 01:48:13 AMSo it's about refusing to accept/implement some of the conveniences of the modern world just to prove a point? Why doesn't the entire state just convert to a Mennonite community?

Tolling is one of the conveniences of the modern world?

Seems a strange hill to die on; but to each, his own.

Tell me you didn't understand the point without telling me you didn't understand the point. If they could make the Mac free to cross, that would obviously be the best option. However, since that will never happen, implementing a toll-by-plate system and beginning to accept E-ZPass would be the next best option. Because that improves the lives of people by not forcing them to stop at a toll booth during peak traffic. It's completely insane to say that stopping at a toll booth adds to your quality of life, which is the implication being made here.

Oh ... trust me; I hadn't missed your actual point -- even though, ironically, you did:

Every driver should always be carrying a "handy" preloaded, nationally-approved tracking device ... for the good of society.

Thank you for fully demonstrating it to everyone else for me.

Signed,
A New Mennonite

Quote from: KelleyCook on July 14, 2024, 01:37:17 AM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 02:57:26 PM

Quote from: KelleyCook on July 13, 2024, 02:50:56 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 13, 2024, 01:48:13 AMSo it's about refusing to accept/implement some of the conveniences of the modern world just to prove a point? Why doesn't the entire state just convert to a Mennonite community?

Tolling is one of the conveniences of the modern world?

Seems a strange hill to die on; but to each, his own.

Tell me you didn't understand the point without telling me you didn't understand the point. If they could make the Mac free to cross, that would obviously be the best option. However, since that will never happen, implementing a toll-by-plate system and beginning to accept E-ZPass would be the next best option. Because that improves the lives of people by not forcing them to stop at a toll booth during peak traffic. It's completely insane to say that stopping at a toll booth adds to your quality of life, which is the implication being made here.

Oh ... trust me; I hadn't missed your actual point -- even though, ironically, you did:

Every driver should always be carrying a "handy" preloaded, nationally-approved tracking device ... for the good of society.

Thank you for fully demonstrating it to everyone else for me.

Signed,
A New Mennonite

The least you could have done is admit this was about Alex Jones-level conspiracy hogwash from the start. Not this bait and switch technique of pretending not to understand the actual argument being made and focusing on a joke instead. Very manipulative behavior. At least the folks who don't like E-ZPass for cultural reasons have worldviews that are actually grounded in reality instead of paranoia.

Are the MacPasses also "nationally-approved tracking devices?"

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 07:52:06 AMEvery state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan

Michigan only has the Mac and the international bridges and tunnel. They are more specific than general travel.

The great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 01:14:50 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 07:52:06 AMEvery state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan

Michigan only has the Mac and the international bridges and tunnel. They are more specific than general travel.

The great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

Kentucky only has toll bridges as well. They are still E-ZPass compatible because separating these systems makes no sense. Who specifically benefits from this nonsense other than conspiracy nutjobs who think that E-ZPass is a tracking device? How much money did the Mackinac Bridge Authority save by implementing a system that is incompatible with anything else?

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 01:14:50 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 07:52:06 AMEvery state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan

Michigan only has the Mac and the international bridges and tunnel. They are more specific than general travel.

The great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

My response was to webtv99 when he said "since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast" when it comes to EZPass adaptability. But they really aren't. This is the only case where there isn't a system in place in the Midwest.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 01:14:50 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 07:52:06 AMEvery state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan

Michigan only has the Mac and the international bridges and tunnel. They are more specific than general travel.

The great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

So, no problem with congestion, then.

Quote from: Rothman on July 14, 2024, 02:02:54 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 01:14:50 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 13, 2024, 07:52:06 AMEvery state in the midwest that utilizes tolling is EZ Pass compatible - except Michigan

Michigan only has the Mac and the international bridges and tunnel. They are more specific than general travel.

The great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

So, no problem with congestion, then.

Yes, there is a problem with congestion on some days of the year. But no, EZPass wouldn't likely have much of an impact on that congestion. I doubt very many of the people crossing the bridge and paying cash have EZPass, no more so than they have Mac Pass. I could be wrong, but since Michigan has so few tolls and most of the bridge crossings are by residents, there wouldn't be an appreciable increase of non-cash tolls by making it EZPass compatible. And consequently, not much of an effect on congestion.

Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2024, 01:05:00 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2024, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2024, 11:22:58 PMI don't think it's that EZPass necessarily connects you to those places on a cultural level, it's that there's just a regional difference in willingness to implement a system that's interoperable with other states, and that may be, at least in part, due to residents of those states being less tolerant of using those systems. And since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast in this regard, it's also fair to intuit a connection between the more slow-paced and down-to-earth lifestyle and resistance to/complacency about technological advancements.

No.

What a great value add to the conversation. Thank you for your insight.

He likes making pronouncements.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 14, 2024, 01:33:26 PMMy response was to webtv99 when he said "since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast" when it comes to EZPass adaptability. But they really aren't. This is the only case where there isn't a system in place in the Midwest.

Except they are.  The Northeast is largely all-electronic by now.  In the Midwest, it's just Illinois and a handful of newer facilities.  Ohio only just recently provided ORT lanes on the mainline Turnpike.  Indiana still doesn't.  And, as I mentioned earlier, utilization is lower.  I think I remember someone posting here that E-ZPass utilization around Buffalo was only 40% a decade ago.  And the rationale given was the same tracking stuff that @KelleyCook posted.

Quote from: KelleyCook on July 14, 2024, 01:37:17 AMOh ... trust me; I hadn't missed your actual point -- even though, ironically, you did:

Every driver should always be carrying a "handy" preloaded, nationally-approved tracking device ... for the good of society.

Thank you for fully demonstrating it to everyone else for me.

Signed,
A New Mennonite

And how would providing the OPTION to use E-ZPass be a problem (assuming the cash lanes remain)?  Unless you're afraid that the percent of people who use the bridge who have E-ZPass is higher than people have been implying, and that they might then decide to go all-electronic.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 01:14:50 PMThe great majority of Michigan residents don't have a Mac Pass. They don't see the need for it because they don't go across it very often (nor across to Canada). Since the residents don't see the need for a pass, why should it be made compatible for out-of-state residents? Do they need it?

IIRC, the Mac Pass was a replacement for pre-purchased toll tokens when they went out of use. There was no intent to make it especially useful for the general traveler, only for the frequent bridge crosser.

So states should say "fuck the people from elsewhere"?  It's that type of mindset that makes me wish the federal government was much more involved in regulating toll roads and whatnot than they are.

Also, don't forget Bay City, which does take E-ZPass (although you have to dig a bit to find that out).  And the Mac and many (all?) of the international crossings have transponders.  Clearly there is an interest in electronic tolling.  Just not electronic tolling that is friendly to non-locals.  I really don't see what the downside to interoperability is, other than "why should we do anything that makes life more convenient for strangers?".

Quite frankly, E-ZPass is quite convenient even without open-road tolling.  Fumbling around for cash sucks.  Taking credit cards helps, but not as much as one would think, because if I'm the only person in the car, that means I still have to handle getting out my wallet, pulling out my card, putting it back, and putting my wallet away, all while I'm stopped there at the booth.  I have no passenger to help me.

I'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

Honestly, the best solution is probably to make it one-way so they can add a couple more lanes in one direction and not have the other direction stopping at all.  E-ZPass interoperability would probably help a little bit, but it wouldn't be a full impact unless the international crossings started accepting it too.  It does feel weird to have one-way at an isolated location like that, but in this case, it's lot like there are other roads between the UP and LP, so the percentage of users who get a free ride or pay both directions despite only traveling one way would probably be low.

If they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:17:15 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 14, 2024, 01:33:26 PMMy response was to webtv99 when he said "since it's clear that the Midwest is still well behind the Northeast" when it comes to EZPass adaptability. But they really aren't. This is the only case where there isn't a system in place in the Midwest.

Except they are.  The Northeast is largely all-electronic by now.  In the Midwest, it's just Illinois and a handful of newer facilities.  Ohio only just recently provided ORT lanes on the mainline Turnpike.  Indiana still doesn't.  And, as I mentioned earlier, utilization is lower.  I think I remember someone posting here that E-ZPass utilization around Buffalo was only 40% a decade ago.  And the rationale given was the same tracking stuff that @KelleyCook posted.

The question was about EZ Pass compatitbility. Not if they are "all-electronic" or had ORT lanes.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

Go to E-ZPass or toll by plate.  If congestion is caused by the toll plaza, then get rid of the plaza.  Also gets rid of the cost of paying toll-takers.

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:39:26 PMIf they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

It would be interesting to see the accounting for that kind of situation. Obviously, they would have an immediate toll collection with E-ZPass. Mixing toll-by-plate both ways in with cash collection for SBD only gets sketchy. Would it be fast enough to link up the vehicle with the toll in real time, and allow the driver to settle up both directions at once?

What if we towed the travel trailer up north and left it for the season - can it pick up the vehicle AND trailer license plates? Would it understand what to do when it returns with no trailer?

How long would the MBA allow for the return trip before billing by mail? It would need to account for someone spending a couple weeks in the U.P. before returning home. OTOH, at some point they have to get paid - does it get billed out 3 or 6 months later when there's no return trip?

What if you're a college student or native Yooper spending the holidays downstate? Would they be asked to pay ahead, and then have a credit for the return trip north? Is there an expiration date for that credit?

I'm starting to understand the MBA's reluctance to make a substantive change. I don't see an obvious way to reduce staff or overhead. Going electronic introduces delays in getting paid. It's confusing for a population which only grudgingly accepts the need for tolls at all on the Bridge, and loudly rejects tolls in other circumstances.

And, no matter which way is chosen, they would have to hike fares on at least the toll-by-plate folks to cover overhead. Depending on what implementing E-ZPass costs, those tolls might have to go up too.

Though, to be fair (pun intended), the fares on the Bridge are pretty cheap; if you can afford to haul up a McMansion on wheels with a 6-figure wanna-be big rig, you can swing $20 to safely get it over the Straits.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I am going to disagree with this assessment. Years ago when ISTHA decided to create the I-Pass, they first used the middle 2 lanes of each mainline plaza. You still had to stop at the booth as if you were paying with coins. Then Hot Rod Blago came along and implemented the ORT that is now on the system. The wait at the toll booths had been eliminated and vehicles could breeze by at the intended posted speed. Once people saw how convenient ORT became along with the interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, electronic tolling in Illinois went way up. Prior to Covid and according to the ISTHA website, 90% of tolls collected in 2018 were by transponder.

So yeah I do think if the Bridge went onto an interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, the congestion would go down. How much? That remains to be seen.

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I don't see how the idea of having it makes much sense as the majority of people crossing the bridge are from Michigan which does not have any other toll roads within the state so how many people from Michigan actually have EZPass would be a good question and if there aren't much then it would be pointless to make the Mackinac Bridge into EZPass. People need to remember Michigan is not an EZPass state.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 15, 2024, 02:50:56 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:39:26 PMIf they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

It would be interesting to see the accounting for that kind of situation. Obviously, they would have an immediate toll collection with E-ZPass. Mixing toll-by-plate both ways in with cash collection for SBD only gets sketchy. Would it be fast enough to link up the vehicle with the toll in real time, and allow the driver to settle up both directions at once?

What if we towed the travel trailer up north and left it for the season - can it pick up the vehicle AND trailer license plates? Would it understand what to do when it returns with no trailer?

How long would the MBA allow for the return trip before billing by mail? It would need to account for someone spending a couple weeks in the U.P. before returning home. OTOH, at some point they have to get paid - does it get billed out 3 or 6 months later when there's no return trip?

What if you're a college student or native Yooper spending the holidays downstate? Would they be asked to pay ahead, and then have a credit for the return trip north? Is there an expiration date for that credit?

I'm starting to understand the MBA's reluctance to make a substantive change. I don't see an obvious way to reduce staff or overhead. Going electronic introduces delays in getting paid. It's confusing for a population which only grudgingly accepts the need for tolls at all on the Bridge, and loudly rejects tolls in other circumstances.

And, no matter which way is chosen, they would have to hike fares on at least the toll-by-plate folks to cover overhead. Depending on what implementing E-ZPass costs, those tolls might have to go up too.

Though, to be fair (pun intended), the fares on the Bridge are pretty cheap; if you can afford to haul up a McMansion on wheels with a 6-figure wanna-be big rig, you can swing $20 to safely get it over the Straits.

I think you're overthinking it.  I wasn't envisioning bill by mail at all; cash users would simply pay a one-way toll in one direction, free ride in the other, while transponder users would pay half the one-way fare each direction, similar to how the Maine Turnpike has a virtual ticket system for (in-house) transponders and a fixed-price barrier and ramp setup for everyone else (yeah, it's weird).  Or they could just do straight one-way tolling for everyone.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 12:12:07 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I don't see how the idea of having it makes much sense as the majority of people crossing the bridge are from Michigan which does not have any other toll roads within the state so how many people from Michigan actually have EZPass would be a good question and if there aren't much then it would be pointless to make the Mackinac Bridge into EZPass. People need to remember Michigan is not an EZPass state.

In a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 15, 2024, 11:52:20 AM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I am going to disagree with this assessment. Years ago when ISTHA decided to create the I-Pass, they first used the middle 2 lanes of each mainline plaza. You still had to stop at the booth as if you were paying with coins. Then Hot Rod Blago came along and implemented the ORT that is now on the system. The wait at the toll booths had been eliminated and vehicles could breeze by at the intended posted speed. Once people saw how convenient ORT became along with the interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, electronic tolling in Illinois went way up. Prior to Covid and according to the ISTHA website, 90% of tolls collected in 2018 were by transponder.

So yeah I do think if the Bridge went onto an interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, the congestion would go down. How much? That remains to be seen.

I would guess that there are a bunch of Michigan residents who already have EZ Passes or IPasses anyway.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2024, 12:59:17 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 15, 2024, 11:52:20 AM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I am going to disagree with this assessment. Years ago when ISTHA decided to create the I-Pass, they first used the middle 2 lanes of each mainline plaza. You still had to stop at the booth as if you were paying with coins. Then Hot Rod Blago came along and implemented the ORT that is now on the system. The wait at the toll booths had been eliminated and vehicles could breeze by at the intended posted speed. Once people saw how convenient ORT became along with the interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, electronic tolling in Illinois went way up. Prior to Covid and according to the ISTHA website, 90% of tolls collected in 2018 were by transponder.

So yeah I do think if the Bridge went onto an interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, the congestion would go down. How much? That remains to be seen.

I would guess that there are a bunch of Michigan residents who already have EZ Passes or IPasses anyway.

AND I will point out, that making MacPass part of the EZ Pass system makes it easier for your citizens who travel to Chicago, Indiana, Ohio, etc.

Quote from: vdeane on July 15, 2024, 12:45:55 PMIn a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

I guess something I didn't realize is the fact that the Bay City toll bridge accepts E-ZPass could pose a problem for residents of that city, who receive special transponders that enable them to cross the bridge for free. Since MacPass is a sticker, there is no way to turn off the tolling function and residents would be charged from the sticker anyway. Still, this would only be a potential problem for another four years.

EDIT: Never mind, BC Passes are fully compatible with the E-ZPass network, not a separate transponder type. This kind of renders the whole argument that Michiganders would have no use for it hilarious since there are folks fewer than 200 miles away from the Mac regularly using E-ZPass. https://baycitybridgepartners.com/tolling/faqs/

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 15, 2024, 05:02:40 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 15, 2024, 12:45:55 PMIn a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

I guess something I didn't realize is the fact that the Bay City toll bridge accepts E-ZPass could pose a problem for residents of that city, who receive special transponders that enable them to cross the bridge for free. Since MacPass is a sticker, there is no way to turn off the tolling function and residents would be charged from the sticker anyway. Still, this would only be a potential problem for another four years.

EDIT: Never mind, BC Passes are fully compatible with the E-ZPass network, not a separate transponder type. This kind of renders the whole argument that Michiganders would have no use for it hilarious since there are folks fewer than 200 miles away from the Mac regularly using E-ZPass. https://baycitybridgepartners.com/tolling/faqs/

This reminds me of the years where E-ZPass was accepted in Florida, but only on some of the Orlando toll roads, not the rest of the state.  Except even then, FDOT was working towards full interoperability (just very slowly), while there's no indication the other toll crossings in Michigan are.  But you never know - the Atlantic Beach Bridge near NYC eventually joined, after years of resisting and nearly creating their own version of MacPass.

Quote from: vdeane on July 15, 2024, 12:45:55 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 15, 2024, 02:50:56 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:39:26 PMIf they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

It would be interesting to see the accounting for that kind of situation. Obviously, they would have an immediate toll collection with E-ZPass. Mixing toll-by-plate both ways in with cash collection for SBD only gets sketchy. Would it be fast enough to link up the vehicle with the toll in real time, and allow the driver to settle up both directions at once?

What if we towed the travel trailer up north and left it for the season - can it pick up the vehicle AND trailer license plates? Would it understand what to do when it returns with no trailer?

How long would the MBA allow for the return trip before billing by mail? It would need to account for someone spending a couple weeks in the U.P. before returning home. OTOH, at some point they have to get paid - does it get billed out 3 or 6 months later when there's no return trip?

What if you're a college student or native Yooper spending the holidays downstate? Would they be asked to pay ahead, and then have a credit for the return trip north? Is there an expiration date for that credit?

I'm starting to understand the MBA's reluctance to make a substantive change. I don't see an obvious way to reduce staff or overhead. Going electronic introduces delays in getting paid. It's confusing for a population which only grudgingly accepts the need for tolls at all on the Bridge, and loudly rejects tolls in other circumstances.

And, no matter which way is chosen, they would have to hike fares on at least the toll-by-plate folks to cover overhead. Depending on what implementing E-ZPass costs, those tolls might have to go up too.

Though, to be fair (pun intended), the fares on the Bridge are pretty cheap; if you can afford to haul up a McMansion on wheels with a 6-figure wanna-be big rig, you can swing $20 to safely get it over the Straits.

I think you're overthinking it.  I wasn't envisioning bill by mail at all; cash users would simply pay a one-way toll in one direction, free ride in the other, while transponder users would pay half the one-way fare each direction, similar to how the Maine Turnpike has a virtual ticket system for (in-house) transponders and a fixed-price barrier and ramp setup for everyone else (yeah, it's weird).  Or they could just do straight one-way tolling for everyone.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 12:12:07 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I don't see how the idea of having it makes much sense as the majority of people crossing the bridge are from Michigan which does not have any other toll roads within the state so how many people from Michigan actually have EZPass would be a good question and if there aren't much then it would be pointless to make the Mackinac Bridge into EZPass. People need to remember Michigan is not an EZPass state.

In a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

So one bridge in the Lower Peninsula currently uses it. A bridge that can easily be shunpiked btw. Still no need for Michigan residents to go out and get an EZPass.

A good compromise between those who want to use an EZ-Pass and those who want to use cash would be to install EZ-Pass/pay-by-plate ORT gantries in the center 1 or 2 lanes in each direction, and keep the other lanes as cash lanes.  To prevent cash payers from holding up the EZ-Pass users they could install electronic BGSs on the approaches to the toll plaza that could have both lanes open to all traffic in low traffic volume times and dynamically change the left lane to EZ-Pass only and the right lane to cash only in times of congestion.  A marketing campaign combined with selling transponders in nearby stores could be used to encourage drivers to adopt EZ-Pass, and in a decade or two when adoption reaches a high level the remaining cash booths could be demolished.

Another (completely overkill) improvement would be to add an EZ-Pass only left entrance from EB US-2 to SB I-75 in the same design as the entrance ramp from Wealthy Street to NB US-131 in Grand Rapids.  That would help speed things up for ORT drivers when the entrance ramp from US-2 to I-75 backs up for miles.

The Michiganders that are anti-E-ZPass are only setting themselves up for full-on toll-by-plate.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 11:07:32 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 15, 2024, 12:45:55 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 15, 2024, 02:50:56 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:39:26 PMIf they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

It would be interesting to see the accounting for that kind of situation. Obviously, they would have an immediate toll collection with E-ZPass. Mixing toll-by-plate both ways in with cash collection for SBD only gets sketchy. Would it be fast enough to link up the vehicle with the toll in real time, and allow the driver to settle up both directions at once?

What if we towed the travel trailer up north and left it for the season - can it pick up the vehicle AND trailer license plates? Would it understand what to do when it returns with no trailer?

How long would the MBA allow for the return trip before billing by mail? It would need to account for someone spending a couple weeks in the U.P. before returning home. OTOH, at some point they have to get paid - does it get billed out 3 or 6 months later when there's no return trip?

What if you're a college student or native Yooper spending the holidays downstate? Would they be asked to pay ahead, and then have a credit for the return trip north? Is there an expiration date for that credit?

I'm starting to understand the MBA's reluctance to make a substantive change. I don't see an obvious way to reduce staff or overhead. Going electronic introduces delays in getting paid. It's confusing for a population which only grudgingly accepts the need for tolls at all on the Bridge, and loudly rejects tolls in other circumstances.

And, no matter which way is chosen, they would have to hike fares on at least the toll-by-plate folks to cover overhead. Depending on what implementing E-ZPass costs, those tolls might have to go up too.

Though, to be fair (pun intended), the fares on the Bridge are pretty cheap; if you can afford to haul up a McMansion on wheels with a 6-figure wanna-be big rig, you can swing $20 to safely get it over the Straits.

I think you're overthinking it.  I wasn't envisioning bill by mail at all; cash users would simply pay a one-way toll in one direction, free ride in the other, while transponder users would pay half the one-way fare each direction, similar to how the Maine Turnpike has a virtual ticket system for (in-house) transponders and a fixed-price barrier and ramp setup for everyone else (yeah, it's weird).  Or they could just do straight one-way tolling for everyone.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 12:12:07 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I don't see how the idea of having it makes much sense as the majority of people crossing the bridge are from Michigan which does not have any other toll roads within the state so how many people from Michigan actually have EZPass would be a good question and if there aren't much then it would be pointless to make the Mackinac Bridge into EZPass. People need to remember Michigan is not an EZPass state.

In a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

So one bridge in the Lower Peninsula currently uses it. A bridge that can easily be shunpiked btw. Still no need for Michigan residents to go out and get an EZPass.

Nobody has answered my question of who, exactly, would be hurt if the MBA began to accept E-ZPass. Bay City residents are an example of some who would be helped, since both systems utilize stickers rather than removable transponders—a resident wishing to use both systems would need two stickers cluttering their windshield. There truly is no legitimate argument to keep these toll systems separate.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 16, 2024, 12:25:37 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 11:07:32 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 15, 2024, 12:45:55 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 15, 2024, 02:50:56 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2024, 04:39:26 PMIf they really wanted to, they could even use AET in the non-stopping direction to retain two-way tolling (with the current rates, as opposed to the double rate for one-way) for MacPass, similar to how Maine uses AET to retain a virtual ticket system for in-state E-ZPass users (out of state and cash users pay fixed rates upon entering and at certain locations on the mainline, even a couple of exit tolls for the interstates).

It would be interesting to see the accounting for that kind of situation. Obviously, they would have an immediate toll collection with E-ZPass. Mixing toll-by-plate both ways in with cash collection for SBD only gets sketchy. Would it be fast enough to link up the vehicle with the toll in real time, and allow the driver to settle up both directions at once?

What if we towed the travel trailer up north and left it for the season - can it pick up the vehicle AND trailer license plates? Would it understand what to do when it returns with no trailer?

How long would the MBA allow for the return trip before billing by mail? It would need to account for someone spending a couple weeks in the U.P. before returning home. OTOH, at some point they have to get paid - does it get billed out 3 or 6 months later when there's no return trip?

What if you're a college student or native Yooper spending the holidays downstate? Would they be asked to pay ahead, and then have a credit for the return trip north? Is there an expiration date for that credit?

I'm starting to understand the MBA's reluctance to make a substantive change. I don't see an obvious way to reduce staff or overhead. Going electronic introduces delays in getting paid. It's confusing for a population which only grudgingly accepts the need for tolls at all on the Bridge, and loudly rejects tolls in other circumstances.

And, no matter which way is chosen, they would have to hike fares on at least the toll-by-plate folks to cover overhead. Depending on what implementing E-ZPass costs, those tolls might have to go up too.

Though, to be fair (pun intended), the fares on the Bridge are pretty cheap; if you can afford to haul up a McMansion on wheels with a 6-figure wanna-be big rig, you can swing $20 to safely get it over the Straits.

I think you're overthinking it.  I wasn't envisioning bill by mail at all; cash users would simply pay a one-way toll in one direction, free ride in the other, while transponder users would pay half the one-way fare each direction, similar to how the Maine Turnpike has a virtual ticket system for (in-house) transponders and a fixed-price barrier and ramp setup for everyone else (yeah, it's weird).  Or they could just do straight one-way tolling for everyone.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 12:12:07 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2024, 04:26:32 PMI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I don't see how the idea of having it makes much sense as the majority of people crossing the bridge are from Michigan which does not have any other toll roads within the state so how many people from Michigan actually have EZPass would be a good question and if there aren't much then it would be pointless to make the Mackinac Bridge into EZPass. People need to remember Michigan is not an EZPass state.

In a way, it kind of is, because Bay City takes it (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6029901,-83.8971314,3a,15y,100.53h,90.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjwLxKtHU8D3NrYojoUDJag%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D100.52627500349148%26pitch%3D-0.9384326397395313%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu).  And again, what is the downside of offering interoperability to those who want it?  This "Michigan is not an E-ZPass state" thing seems like an attitude that is opposing it for the sake of opposing it.

So one bridge in the Lower Peninsula currently uses it. A bridge that can easily be shunpiked btw. Still no need for Michigan residents to go out and get an EZPass.

Nobody has answered my question of who, exactly, would be hurt if the MBA began to accept E-ZPass. Bay City residents are an example of some who would be helped, since both systems utilize stickers rather than removable transponders—a resident wishing to use both systems would need two stickers cluttering their windshield. There truly is no legitimate argument to keep these toll systems separate.

Bay City is a city that I am very familiar with. It's only about a 15 minute drive from my house to downtown Bay City. People aren't going to use the toll bridge when there are three free bridges that you can use to cross the river in Bay City, also if you are coming from Saginaw depending on where in Bay City you want to be you would cross the river in Saginaw and drive up M-13 into Bay City. This has been talked about to death in this area and most people know to avoid the Liberty Bridge. Furthermore Bay City should have asked again when Whitmer became governor for the state to take over the bridges.

I don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

One more time:  Who would be helped are those travelers (even if a relatively small number of them) who use the few tolled bridges in Michigan and also use (even if relatively infrequently) any of the other toll facilities in the Midwest/Northeast that operate with E-ZPass.  If a tolling authority is going to install an electronic tolling system anyway, it makes sense to go with the one that every other tolling authority in the region uses.  That at least offers some extra convenience to region-wide travelers, even if their numbers are small.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2024, 01:05:35 PM

QuoteI'm not saying it would be a bad idea to have EZPass. I'm saying that it's not likely that it would contribute much to relieving congestion on those heavy travel days.

I am going to disagree with this assessment. Years ago when ISTHA decided to create the I-Pass, they first used the middle 2 lanes of each mainline plaza. You still had to stop at the booth as if you were paying with coins. Then Hot Rod Blago came along and implemented the ORT that is now on the system. The wait at the toll booths had been eliminated and vehicles could breeze by at the intended posted speed. Once people saw how convenient ORT became along with the interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, electronic tolling in Illinois went way up. Prior to Covid and according to the ISTHA website, 90% of tolls collected in 2018 were by transponder.

So yeah I do think if the Bridge went onto an interoperability with the EZ-Pass system, the congestion would go down. How much? That remains to be seen.

What are the counts of vehicles frequently (let's say at least a few times each week) using the Illinois Tollway, and what are the counts of vehicles frequently using the Mackinac Bridge?  I expect that a few travelers will have an E-ZPass and that would move things along a bit, but unlike Illinois there are not nearly enough of them to warrant dedicating any number of lanes to ORT.  Doing so would just add to the congestion at busy times.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

This may sound like a dumb question but is the EZ Pass allowed on the toll bridges to Canada? If so, there's your answer.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

I know a ton of people who have iPasses in Wisconsin and Iowa. Because it must makes it easier to travel in Illinois and beyond. Honestly it seems like it would make it more convenient for everyone involved - how could they NOT be helped?

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 16, 2024, 11:43:13 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

This may sound like a dumb question but is the EZ Pass allowed on the toll bridges to Canada? If so, there's your answer.

Yes, at least at Lewiston Bridge, Peace Bridge (with a 50% EZPass discount!) and as of more recently, the Thousand Islands Bridge.

I assume it's also accepted at the Rainbow Bridge but I honestly haven't used that bridge in so long that I can't remember for sure.

Also the congestion is on the bridge where it's narrowed down to one lane for most of the length of the bridge.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 15, 2024, 11:07:32 PMSo one bridge in the Lower Peninsula currently uses it. A bridge that can easily be shunpiked btw. Still no need for Michigan residents to go out and get an EZPass.

I think you (and the bridge authority) underestimate how many Michiganders already have an EZ Pass or I-Pass for traveling through Illinois and Ohio to popular out of state destinations.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 16, 2024, 11:43:13 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

This may sound like a dumb question but is the EZ Pass allowed on the toll bridges to Canada? If so, there's your answer.

No to the Michigan ones but yes to most of the New York ones (Ogdensburg and Seaway over the St. Lawrence being the two exceptions).  Given this, if the Michigan ones joined it would be quite convenient for anyone cutting through Canada to get between Michigan and New York.

Quote from: vdeane on July 16, 2024, 12:48:27 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 16, 2024, 11:43:13 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

This may sound like a dumb question but is the EZ Pass allowed on the toll bridges to Canada? If so, there's your answer.

No to the Michigan ones but yes to most of the New York ones (Ogdensburg and Seaway over the St. Lawrence being the two exceptions).  Given this, if the Michigan ones joined it would be quite convenient for anyone cutting through Canada to get between Michigan and New York.

That might put some pressure on the 407 ETR to join EZ Pass as well.

I'm further away from any E-ZPass tolling location outside of Minnesota than most people in the lower peninsula of Michigan are from E-ZPass locations in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. I used to have four separate transponder accounts for I-Pass, MNPass, ExpressToll, and K-Tag because transponders do make a difference, either to save time by not having to stop at a toll booth, breezing through heavy traffic in the HOT lane, or to save money and time by not having to pay as much attention to bill-by-mail toll charges with an extra photo fee. I know many other Minnesotans who closed their I-Pass accounts when the HOT lanes in the cities began taking E-ZPass. It's a lot more convenient to have only two of these accounts to replenish and replace my debit card information in when it expires. I do realize that I am not the average traveller, but plenty of Minnesotans had both I-Pass and MNPass accounts before the switch was made since it isn't that far to Illinois, and there are no monthly fees if you want to get a transponder for occasional use.

In the past ten years, I have visited four tolling locations where I needed to do something other than use one of my transponders: the Fort Frances International Bridge and the Sault Ste Marie International Bridge, the former of which only takes cash and the latter of which I would have had to set up a new account to get yet another transponder; the 407 ETR which has its own transponder with a monthly fee; and... the Mackinac Bridge, which I have crossed a total of five times in the past ten years. Was it a big deal to pay cash at the Mac? No, partly because the only times I've needed to cross have been in the winter and there were only a couple of vehicles ahead in line. Would I have appreciated the option to just use E-ZPass? Yes, especially after the first crossing. If I would ever need to make the trip during peak traffic, I would appreciate it even more—even if I had to wait in a line for the toll lanes to widen.

Maybe MI just wants to keep the bridge congested, then.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2024, 08:04:30 AMI don't see who would be helped by having an EZ-Pass in a state that doesn't have toll roads. We have a few toll bridges in Michigan but they are so far and few in between that it's rather pointless to have a transponder.

Thinking about this, it reminds me a lot of the attitude my parents had towards E-ZPass, prior to the switch to AET on the Thruway "forcing" them to get it (Dad doesn't do bill by mail; I probably inherited my attitude towards that method of payment from him).  As far as they were concerned, "we only drive the 44-45 section, and only a few times per year, why should we get it?".  Meanwhile, they would often be annoyed waiting in line to pay the toll, especially when returning home, and whenever they'd ride with me (or on the rare occasion drive my car), they were always impressed with how convenient it was.  Not to mention, despite joking that the initial $25 balance was enough to last them the rest of their lives, they've auto-replenished at least once, because despite "only driving the 44-45 section, and only a few times per year", Mom drove to Niagara Falls, both Mom and Dad to a daytrip to Auburn last year, and Mom visited me in Albany when I had my wisdom teeth taken out, so their actual utilization is higher than they would initially assume.

Quote from: Brandon on July 16, 2024, 02:01:38 PMThat might put some pressure on the 407 ETR to join EZ Pass as well.

One can only hope, although I think the ETR might be stubborn in that respect.

And when I came back Southbound yesterday there wasn't a problem at all. Both lanes were open and the traffic was moving fine.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:47:31 AMAnd when I came back Southbound yesterday there wasn't a problem at all. Both lanes were open and the traffic was moving fine.

Then it must all have been an illusion before. Traffic back ups? What traffic back ups?

When I can through on a random Tuesday afternoon, it was fine!

When I was crossing Northbound yesterday since I see my post didn't post. It was fine at first, then when you got to the suspension part of the bridge it narrowed down to one lane and it was a little slow going through there but not stopped at all. Then after the suspension part the second lane opened back up and people were able to pass. Then get up to the toll booth and I was the 2nd car in line, the other lanes had three cars. Having 2-3 cars at a toll booth is not congestion.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 08:51:30 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:47:31 AMAnd when I came back Southbound yesterday there wasn't a problem at all. Both lanes were open and the traffic was moving fine.

Then it must all have been an illusion before. Traffic back ups? What traffic back ups?

When I can through on a random Tuesday afternoon, it was fine!

I watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan. I've gone through on a Friday in the summer before and it was just as fine.

Here's what does it, truck traffic can only move at 20 mph and when you get stuck behind one of those in one lane traffic you know what happens. With both lanes open you can pass and do the 45 mph speed limit.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

Here's an article from WRKR 107.7 Kalamazoo's Classic Rock station.

https://wrkr.com/hate-long-lines-at-the-mackinac-bridge-blame-credit-card-users/

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PMThe toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

Really? Because that's not what this article says...you know...the one you linked to.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:11:25 PMHere's an article from WRKR 107.7 Kalamazoo's Classic Rock station.

https://wrkr.com/hate-long-lines-at-the-mackinac-bridge-blame-credit-card-users/

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Flint is being incredibly obstinate. Of course there is reason for Michigan residents to use the ITR or Ohio Turnpike. I have seen PLENTY of Michigan plates on both - not to mention all over the tollways around Chicago. And it of course makes sense to make Mac Pass compatible with EZ Pass. What is the harm? Maybe some up front costs? It would make the lives of Michigan residents easier.

His arguments are silly and illogical.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

No we wouldn't and that isn't the reason. The reason is because there is no place to use EZ-Pass, we don't have toll roads here, a few toll bridges here and there isn't a reason to get it or for those bridges to use it when not very many of the vehicles crossing the toll bridges have EZ-Pass. It's already been figured out by a bridge worker that credit card users are the reason for the congestion at the toll plaza if there is congestion.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PMthe people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

Many from outside the forum have:
https://x.com/gasbuddyguy/status/1675321390877089792?s=46&t=XdKh7ZDmCSJQHQso79oQ8Q
https://www.facebook.com/share/UxU5SHKxvix3Nfce/?mibextid=WC7FNe
https://www.facebook.com/share/yzV5MaxCFXPTwY3f/?mibextid=WC7FNe

Makes me think this is about nothing more than corporate greed and control. They just want your $87!

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Flint is being incredibly obstinate. Of course there is reason for Michigan residents to use the ITR or Ohio Turnpike. I have seen PLENTY of Michigan plates on both - not to mention all over the tollways around Chicago. And it of course makes sense to make Mac Pass compatible with EZ Pass. What is the harm? Maybe some up front costs? It would make the lives of Michigan residents easier.

His arguments are silly and illogical.

Not with alternate routes to use there isn't. And of course you've seen Michigan plates on the ITR and Ohio Turnpike and the Chicago area since Michigan is within a few miles of both toll roads and within an hour of Chicago. What's the point in doing it when very few of the Mackinac Bridge passengers have it? That's one of the reason's they don't have it. And yes a bridge worker figured out that credit card users are the reason for any backups at the toll plaza. There are only four lanes in each direction with two being for MacPass and two open lanes with an emergency lane and the bridge itself is only four lanes with no room for expansion.

My arguments aren't silly or illogical at all.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 17, 2024, 02:18:30 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PMthe people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

Many from outside the forum have:
https://x.com/gasbuddyguy/status/1675321390877089792?s=46&t=XdKh7ZDmCSJQHQso79oQ8Q
https://www.facebook.com/share/UxU5SHKxvix3Nfce/?mibextid=WC7FNe
https://www.facebook.com/share/yzV5MaxCFXPTwY3f/?mibextid=WC7FNe

Makes me think this is about nothing more than corporate greed and control. They just want your $87!

Having EZPass would have done nothing to stop that backup. That was just before the 4th of July on a Saturday afternoon with construction going on and the only way into the U.P. gets backed up, not surprising at all. People complaining about the Mackinac Bridge not having EZPass probably very rarely cross the bridge.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:24:56 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Flint is being incredibly obstinate. Of course there is reason for Michigan residents to use the ITR or Ohio Turnpike. I have seen PLENTY of Michigan plates on both - not to mention all over the tollways around Chicago. And it of course makes sense to make Mac Pass compatible with EZ Pass. What is the harm? Maybe some up front costs? It would make the lives of Michigan residents easier.

His arguments are silly and illogical.

Not with alternate routes to use there isn't. And of course you've seen Michigan plates on the ITR and Ohio Turnpike and the Chicago area since Michigan is within a few miles of both toll roads and within an hour of Chicago. What's the point in doing it when very few of the Mackinac Bridge passengers have it? That's one of the reason's they don't have it. And yes a bridge worker figured out that credit card users are the reason for any backups at the toll plaza. There are only four lanes in each direction with two being for MacPass and two open lanes with an emergency lane and the bridge itself is only four lanes with no room for expansion.

My arguments aren't silly or illogical at all.

Yes they are.

The point in doing it is to encourage more people to get it - which in turn would reduce back ups. Think about this a second. To get a Mac Pass now requires you to pay $88 in deposits and fees. If you only get up there once or twice a season, why would you bother? You would just pay the cash, or put it on your credit card, and be part of the back up problem

But if you ALSO had a pass that would work in Ohio, Indiana and the Chicago area, even if you only go there occasionally, the interoperability makes the purchase much more attractive.

What is the point of NOT doing it if it encourages more people to purchase the product and help to alleviate the back up problem?

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 02:40:16 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:24:56 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Flint is being incredibly obstinate. Of course there is reason for Michigan residents to use the ITR or Ohio Turnpike. I have seen PLENTY of Michigan plates on both - not to mention all over the tollways around Chicago. And it of course makes sense to make Mac Pass compatible with EZ Pass. What is the harm? Maybe some up front costs? It would make the lives of Michigan residents easier.

His arguments are silly and illogical.

Not with alternate routes to use there isn't. And of course you've seen Michigan plates on the ITR and Ohio Turnpike and the Chicago area since Michigan is within a few miles of both toll roads and within an hour of Chicago. What's the point in doing it when very few of the Mackinac Bridge passengers have it? That's one of the reason's they don't have it. And yes a bridge worker figured out that credit card users are the reason for any backups at the toll plaza. There are only four lanes in each direction with two being for MacPass and two open lanes with an emergency lane and the bridge itself is only four lanes with no room for expansion.

My arguments aren't silly or illogical at all.

Yes they are.

The point in doing it is to encourage more people to get it - which in turn would reduce back ups. Think about this a second. To get a Mac Pass now requires you to pay $88 in deposits and fees. If you only get up there once or twice a season, why would you bother? You would just pay the cash, or put it on your credit card, and be part of the back up problem

But if you ALSO had a pass that would work in Ohio, Indiana and the Chicago area, even if you only go there occasionally, the interoperability makes the purchase much more attractive.

What is the point of NOT doing it if it encourages more people to purchase the product and help to alleviate the back up problem?

It's ridiculous that anyone thinks that if the Mackinac Bridge had EZPass that it would reduce backups. Why would they do that when the people that would have it already have MacPass? The bridge is two lanes in each direction, you are funneling an entire section of state over a bridge with only two lanes to use, you get up to the toll plaza you have 4 and you are at the boot for less than 30 seconds. It's the credit card users that cause the backups now that I know that bit of information. You wouldn't bother getting a MacPass if you only crossed a couple times a year, that's for people that cross the bridge all the time. How many people is it going to encourage to get? If people are only crossing a couple times a year and not going to Ohio, Indiana or Chicago then it's pointless. There are only about 4 million crossings a year that isn't very much.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:51:42 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 02:40:16 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:24:56 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 17, 2024, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 17, 2024, 01:18:24 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PM

Quote from: GaryV on July 17, 2024, 09:20:45 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 08:58:22 AMI watch the Mackinac Bridge cams a lot and it's not a new thing for traffic backups going North on Friday and going South on Sunday in Michigan.

Which also happens on many of the freeways - I-75, US-23, US-127, etc. It's not a toll thing, it's a "Going Up North" thing.

Yes the toll booths slow it down more than if they weren't there. But savvy travelers expect some slowdowns on weekends and holidays, and they plan ahead.

The theme of this thread has been that the delays are because of the tolls because there's no EZPass. While that contributes, it's not the primary cause.

Yep all of them have traffic on the weekends going up and coming back. For about 80 miles between Grayling and the bridge you have Detroit, Grand Rapids and Lansing traffic all running on one highway. Grand Rapids traffic would come in with Lansing traffic on US-127 since i believe the cut over to I-75 would be M-55. So you have anyone that is going up North from 3 of the top 7 largest cities in the state that is going to add a lot of traffic. Grand Rapids traffic though has some alternates you could use probably getting to I-75 around the Gaylord area at the furthest North unless they would run US-31 between Petoskey and Mackinaw City but that route is of course slower.

The toll booths have never really been the cause of any backups on the bridge or leading up to the bridge. There is no need for EZ-Pass on the Mackinac Bridge and the people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

And as far as using it in states that have toll roads as a Michigan resident, there is no reason for anyone living in Michigan to use the Indiana Toll Road or Ohio Turnpike (until you get east of Cleveland) except for those people maybe living close to the border. OH-2 is the route to use going to Cleveland and I-94 is the route to Chicago so no need for anyone living in Michigan to have one. Once you are in the Chicago area it's a little tricky but still toll roads there are avoidable as well. And as far as the Liberty Bridge in Bay City accepting EZ-Pass, that might be the case but how many people living in the Bay City area actually have an EZ-Pass? I doubt it's many because it's a new thing and no other toll facility in the area has it.

So just so I am clear on your reasoning. Michigan residents would have no use for an EZ-Pass or compatible system on the Mackinaw Bridge because there are shunpikes to avoid 80/90 in Indiana and Ohio. Is that the basics? Granted, I love to use Ohio 2 to avoid the Ohio Tpk. But it's not as quick as the Turnpike.

Flint is being incredibly obstinate. Of course there is reason for Michigan residents to use the ITR or Ohio Turnpike. I have seen PLENTY of Michigan plates on both - not to mention all over the tollways around Chicago. And it of course makes sense to make Mac Pass compatible with EZ Pass. What is the harm? Maybe some up front costs? It would make the lives of Michigan residents easier.

His arguments are silly and illogical.

Not with alternate routes to use there isn't. And of course you've seen Michigan plates on the ITR and Ohio Turnpike and the Chicago area since Michigan is within a few miles of both toll roads and within an hour of Chicago. What's the point in doing it when very few of the Mackinac Bridge passengers have it? That's one of the reason's they don't have it. And yes a bridge worker figured out that credit card users are the reason for any backups at the toll plaza. There are only four lanes in each direction with two being for MacPass and two open lanes with an emergency lane and the bridge itself is only four lanes with no room for expansion.

My arguments aren't silly or illogical at all.

Yes they are.

The point in doing it is to encourage more people to get it - which in turn would reduce back ups. Think about this a second. To get a Mac Pass now requires you to pay $88 in deposits and fees. If you only get up there once or twice a season, why would you bother? You would just pay the cash, or put it on your credit card, and be part of the back up problem

But if you ALSO had a pass that would work in Ohio, Indiana and the Chicago area, even if you only go there occasionally, the interoperability makes the purchase much more attractive.

What is the point of NOT doing it if it encourages more people to purchase the product and help to alleviate the back up problem?

It's ridiculous that anyone thinks that if the Mackinac Bridge had EZPass that it would reduce backups. Why would they do that when the people that would have it already have MacPass? The bridge is two lanes in each direction, you are funneling an entire section of state over a bridge with only two lanes to use, you get up to the toll plaza you have 4 and you are at the boot for less than 30 seconds. It's the credit card users that cause the backups now that I know that bit of information. You wouldn't bother getting a MacPass if you only crossed a couple times a year, that's for people that cross the bridge all the time. How many people is it going to encourage to get? If people are only crossing a couple times a year and not going to Ohio, Indiana or Chicago then it's pointless. There are only about 4 million crossings a year that isn't very much.

OK, this is my last post on the subject because you have put your obstinate stake in the ground and aren't going to move it no matter how illogical you are being.

You still don't seem to understand that there is no significant downside to making it EZ Pass compatible. It would just make it easier for those who have EZ Pass, AND for those who have Mac Pass and want to use it in Chicago, Indiana, Ohio, etc. And even if it has only a small impact on weekend back-ups, why not do it?

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:28:21 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 17, 2024, 02:18:30 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PMthe people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

Many from outside the forum have:
https://x.com/gasbuddyguy/status/1675321390877089792?s=46&t=XdKh7ZDmCSJQHQso79oQ8Q
https://www.facebook.com/share/UxU5SHKxvix3Nfce/?mibextid=WC7FNe
https://www.facebook.com/share/yzV5MaxCFXPTwY3f/?mibextid=WC7FNe

Makes me think this is about nothing more than corporate greed and control. They just want your $87!

Having EZPass would have done nothing to stop that backup. That was just before the 4th of July on a Saturday afternoon with construction going on and the only way into the U.P. gets backed up, not surprising at all. People complaining about the Mackinac Bridge not having EZPass probably very rarely cross the bridge.

Obviously, a lot of the people commenting here have never traveled north through Michigan at the start of a holiday weekend or south at the end of a holiday weekend.  This isn't just a bridge phenomenon.  You've got like half the population of the state and out of staters too heading north at the start of the weekend and heading back south at the end of the weekend, along a very few routes that weren't designed to handle anywhere near that type of traffic.  On Friday, if you head north from Muskegon along US-31, from Grand Rapids on US-131, Lansing along US-127 and Detroit/Flint/Saginaw/Bay City using I-75, you're going to run into backups and sometimes almost entire routes turn into parking lots.  And it only gets worse the further north you go with routes ending, some becoming only 2 lanes and resort areas like Traverse City and Petosky getting over-loaded with traffic.  I-75 narrows from 4 lanes to 2 near Bay City and US-127 ends at I-75 south of Grayling.  So, you end up with 1 freeway with 2 lanes in each direction and one 2-lane highway handling virtually all the weekend traffic heading to several resort areas and up to the straits and beyond.  Yeah, there's very little traffic along these routes during the week, but traffic increases exponentially on weekends, especially holiday weekends.

What I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

It's unsurprising, but silly, that credit cards are cited by Bridge Authority employees as the holdup. We're not taking about some one-lane toll bridge off a two-track in the middle of the wilderness, and they're not using imprinters with carbon paper and making people sign them.

All sorts of communication and other things make the crossing of the Straits in that general vicinity, so it's not like the Bridge Authority couldn't come up with decent high-speed internet, even if it's having to play in the wholesale market with wireless ISPs and such. Even if it had no other options, I'm sure Starlink would be happy to oblige.

If I can unlock a gas pump in under 10 seconds with tap-to-pay, the Bridge Authority should be able to crack off a series of $4 or $8 transactions just as quickly. But you've got to get driver's ready to tap or swipe and get rolling; too many are too distracted. If done properly, a credit card should go as fast as having exact cash.

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 17, 2024, 05:27:21 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 02:28:21 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 17, 2024, 02:18:30 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 01:07:35 PMthe people that have a problem with that should bother the Mackinac Bridge Authority.

Many from outside the forum have:
https://x.com/gasbuddyguy/status/1675321390877089792?s=46&t=XdKh7ZDmCSJQHQso79oQ8Q
https://www.facebook.com/share/UxU5SHKxvix3Nfce/?mibextid=WC7FNe
https://www.facebook.com/share/yzV5MaxCFXPTwY3f/?mibextid=WC7FNe

Makes me think this is about nothing more than corporate greed and control. They just want your $87!

Having EZPass would have done nothing to stop that backup. That was just before the 4th of July on a Saturday afternoon with construction going on and the only way into the U.P. gets backed up, not surprising at all. People complaining about the Mackinac Bridge not having EZPass probably very rarely cross the bridge.

Obviously, a lot of the people commenting here have never traveled north through Michigan at the start of a holiday weekend or south at the end of a holiday weekend.  This isn't just a bridge phenomenon.  You've got like half the population of the state and out of staters too heading north at the start of the weekend and heading back south at the end of the weekend, along a very few routes that weren't designed to handle anywhere near that type of traffic.  On Friday, if you head north from Muskegon along US-31, from Grand Rapids on US-131, Lansing along US-127 and Detroit/Flint/Saginaw/Bay City using I-75, you're going to run into backups and sometimes almost entire routes turn into parking lots.  And it only gets worse the further north you go with routes ending, some becoming only 2 lanes and resort areas like Traverse City and Petosky getting over-loaded with traffic.  I-75 narrows from 4 lanes to 2 near Bay City and US-127 ends at I-75 south of Grayling.  So, you end up with 1 freeway with 2 lanes in each direction and one 2-lane highway handling virtually all the weekend traffic heading to several resort areas and up to the straits and beyond.  Yeah, there's very little traffic along these routes during the week, but traffic increases exponentially on weekends, especially holiday weekends.

Exactly. I live in Saginaw so I'm always on I-75 and know the highway too well actually but that's what the problem is, you have half the population of the state living in one Metro area and then have a few other Metro area's sprinkled across the state with populations trying to get to where they are going Up North. I'm not sure how many other states you can say you have a downstate home and an Up North home, I know you can in Minnesota, Wisconsin and New York but that's where the problem lies.

Like I said I live in Saginaw and have a cabin in Cedarville 30 miles south of the Soo and anytime I want to go up there I have to cross you guessed it, the Mackinac Bridge so yep I know that crossing all too well. I knew there was going to be traffic problems for the 4th of July with the construction that is going on. It took me 20 minutes to cross it southbound a month ago and that's after the toll booths so that wasn't the problem, it was three large semis going extremely slow. EZPass wouldn't do anything to help any congestion on the bridge.

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

The mention of internet speeds being slow enough to make credit card transactions an issue in the article made me think about the E-ZPass/MacPass thing.  Could internet speeds be a reason why they're not interoperable?  E-ZPass payments would have to be sent to the IAG and the home agencies of the tag holders; MacPass, on the other hand, can be processed on site.  This might also be the reason it's so expensive: if they might be trying to minimize card transactions by keeping balances high instead of starting with a more typical balance that would replenish sooner (they probably also have a disproportionate amount of trucks in their transponder user base, since Mackinaw City and St. Ignace aren't that big).

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 17, 2024, 08:49:27 PMIt's unsurprising, but silly, that credit cards are cited by Bridge Authority employees as the holdup. We're not taking about some one-lane toll bridge off a two-track in the middle of the wilderness, and they're not using imprinters with carbon paper and making people sign them.

All sorts of communication and other things make the crossing of the Straits in that general vicinity, so it's not like the Bridge Authority couldn't come up with decent high-speed internet, even if it's having to play in the wholesale market with wireless ISPs and such. Even if it had no other options, I'm sure Starlink would be happy to oblige.

If I can unlock a gas pump in under 10 seconds with tap-to-pay, the Bridge Authority should be able to crack off a series of $4 or $8 transactions just as quickly. But you've got to get driver's ready to tap or swipe and get rolling; too many are too distracted. If done properly, a credit card should go as fast as having exact cash.

This reminds me of another thread where the logistics of taking credit cards came up.  And in both that thread and this thread, in the end it comes down to the difference between what can be solved and what the people in an organization are willing to solve.

Also, I certainly have experience with the "solved" scenario.  I crossed the St. Lawrence on A-30 back in May, and it was easy, barely any more time than it would have taken to use a 5 mph E-ZPass lane on the Thruway (back when those were still a thing).  I just pulled up, held my card on the tap to pay reader, and off I went, the time at the actual booth barely even took a second.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

*sigh*

I think this statement speaks for itself.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

Having lived in Wisconsin and Iowa, I have seen all sorts of people with iPasses in both states even though neither have toll roads. I am one of them. I wouldn't be surprised if there are tens of thousands of Michigan residents that have one already.

 :popcorn:

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 18, 2024, 08:52:45 AMI wouldn't be surprised if there are tens of thousands of Michigan residents that have one already.

So fractions of a percent?

None of us is arguing that no one in Michigan has an EZPass. Just that the vast majority don't, because they don't often use toll roads. I haven't been to Chicago in years. I can't think of a scenario where I might need to use the Indiana Toll Road. And the last couple of times I went to Ohio, I shunpiked.

Ok. This has been kind of beaten like a dead horse. Those who don't want the Bridge (and other Michigan Toll Bridges) to join EZ-Pass, come up with a solution for the congestion on the Bridge.

I suggested to twin span the bridge and move the plaza for northbound traffic. That was shot down.

So give us a solution.

I reached out to the MBA and they said they don't keep stats on in versus out of state traffic, which I find unsurprising.

They did say they assume out-of-staters do increase during the tourist season, of course.

Per their monthly stats, the number of vehicles does increase considerably during the thawed months.

Still seems to me that AET/Toll-By-Plate is the answer, with E-ZPass compatibility.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 18, 2024, 11:10:05 AMI suggested to twin span the bridge and move the plaza for northbound traffic. That was shot down.

So give us a solution.

If *I* was running the Bridge Authority, I'd institute the following:
- Initially, figure out and implement a solution for credit card tap and pay, with the goal of 4 transactions per tollbooth per minute. Keep the tollbooth attendant there (it appears they're needed to identify the vehicle type anyway) with the goal of keeping the traffic moving on busy days.

- Convert tolls to southbound-only, with double the current tolls. This is the same model used for the Confederation Bridge to Prince Edward Island - you can come in for free, but to leave with your vehicle you've got to pay up. Write off one-way northbound traffic as negligible (as most users will take the Bridge both ways). If you get congestion, it's on the St. Ignace side that's better configured to handle it.

Relocate the admin building to the west side next to the State Police post, and run two northbound through lanes through the space the admin building occupied. Now I have up to 10 lanes I can feed into 2 lanes southbound without moving the tollbooths. At a rate of 4 transactions per tollbooth per minute, that gives us up to 2400 vehicles per hour of southbound throughput, and no restrictions on northbound throughput. 

- Better enforce trucks and other slow vehicles using the right lane only on the Bridge.

- Improved/increased electronic signage indicating traffic/weather conditions at the Bridge, giving travelers opportunity to stop and wait out higher congestion periods.

This proposal seems like it might work to reduce congestion.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 18, 2024, 01:33:13 PMIf you get congestion, it's on the St. Ignace side that's better configured to handle it

The US-2 interchange might need to be reconfigured, so that EB traffic doesn't have to merge with SB I-75, but gets their own path to the toll booths. There's probably more traffic coming from the west than from the north. Or at least similar volumes.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

If Minnesota found a demand for E-ZPass integration despite having zero toll roads and not bordering any state with toll roads, Michigan should have a demand since it has two land borders with states using it.

Quote from: GaryV on July 18, 2024, 11:03:21 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 18, 2024, 08:52:45 AMI wouldn't be surprised if there are tens of thousands of Michigan residents that have one already.

So fractions of a percent?

None of us is arguing that no one in Michigan has an EZPass. Just that the vast majority don't, because they don't often use toll roads. I haven't been to Chicago in years. I can't think of a scenario where I might need to use the Indiana Toll Road. And the last couple of times I went to Ohio, I shunpiked.

No kidding the vast majority don't. No one was suggesting otherwise. But since a bunch do, why NOT make it EZ Pass compatible? No one seems to be able to answer that question.

And your personal travel habits really aren't relevant.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AMEven if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass.

So how often is often enough to warrant getting an E-ZPass?

Quote from: GaryV on July 18, 2024, 11:03:21 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 18, 2024, 08:52:45 AMI wouldn't be surprised if there are tens of thousands of Michigan residents that have one already.

So fractions of a percent?

None of us is arguing that no one in Michigan has an EZPass. Just that the vast majority don't, because they don't often use toll roads. I haven't been to Chicago in years. I can't think of a scenario where I might need to use the Indiana Toll Road. And the last couple of times I went to Ohio, I shunpiked.

I'm in about the same boat. 99% of the state doesn't have EZPass I'm pretty sure of that. I haven't been to Chicago in quite awhile either and when I do go there I shunpike. I don't see any reason to use the ITR and last time I drove across Ohio to Pennsylvania I used US-30 to go east in Ohio so there's that. I will not give any of my money to the Ohio Turnpike or Indiana Toll Road so I will always shunpike. The only time I don't is when I'm crossing the Mackinac Bridge but that's worth the $4 to cross it.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 18, 2024, 02:16:55 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

If Minnesota found a demand for E-ZPass integration despite having zero toll roads and not bordering any state with toll roads, Michigan should have a demand since it has two land borders with states using it.

Minnesota has high-occupancy toll lane in the Twin Cities area. Michigan does not have that, there are HOV lanes near Detroit on I-75 but they are not tolled and only used as HOV lanes during rush hour. So Michigan has no demand for it, they aren't obligated to care about another state's toll road system.

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

Excuse me, but I believe that you're the one making an invalid assumption here.

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 19, 2024, 12:05:22 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

Excuse me, but I believe that you're the one making an invalid assumption here.

Then elaborate on whatever it is that is invalid?

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 11:40:42 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 18, 2024, 02:16:55 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

If Minnesota found a demand for E-ZPass integration despite having zero toll roads and not bordering any state with toll roads, Michigan should have a demand since it has two land borders with states using it.

Minnesota has high-occupancy toll lane in the Twin Cities area. Michigan does not have that, there are HOV lanes near Detroit on I-75 but they are not tolled and only used as HOV lanes during rush hour. So Michigan has no demand for it, they aren't obligated to care about another state's toll road system.

OK, I'm convinced you're trolling now, but the point still stands that we had a system that primarily attracted a very small, very specific amount of commuters before being brought into the E-ZPass system.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 19, 2024, 12:18:39 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 11:40:42 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 18, 2024, 02:16:55 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 18, 2024, 08:16:12 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 10:40:03 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 17, 2024, 09:03:17 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 17, 2024, 07:42:30 PMWhat I get from Flint is that he thinks Michiganders don't leave their state.

Their state? I live here too. And as someone who once in awhile leaves the state why would I think that?

Because your whole argument assumes it.

No it doesn't. Why would a Michigan resident need an EZPass when Michigan doesn't have toll roads? Even if someone from Michigan does travel on a toll road outside of Michigan it's not like it's often enough for someone to think oh man I should have an EZPass. That doesn't mean that people from Michigan don't have it though.

If Minnesota found a demand for E-ZPass integration despite having zero toll roads and not bordering any state with toll roads, Michigan should have a demand since it has two land borders with states using it.

Minnesota has high-occupancy toll lane in the Twin Cities area. Michigan does not have that, there are HOV lanes near Detroit on I-75 but they are not tolled and only used as HOV lanes during rush hour. So Michigan has no demand for it, they aren't obligated to care about another state's toll road system.

OK, I'm convinced you're trolling now, but the point still stands that we had a system that primarily attracted a very small, very specific amount of commuters before being brought into the E-ZPass system.

And what part of my comment would make you think I'm trolling? This is Michigan not Ohio, not Indiana, not Illinois it's Michigan, we don't have toll roads here, just a few toll bridges and that's it. The average Michigan resident doesn't even use the Mackinac Bridge on a regular basis anyway, in fact there are people in Michigan that have never been across the Mackinac Bridge.

And this never was an argument, it's a discussion forum why the attacks on people here?

I wasn't intending to personally attack you, I just find the lengths you go to in order to justify something a great deal of people find absurd pretty funny. Honestly, yes, I understand your point of view since I would have made the same arguments about MNPass before it was brought into the E-ZPass system. There are probably fewer than 5,000 Minnesotans who have a semi-regular use for E-ZPass outside of Minnesota. Certainly a lot less than there are in Michigan. But it's just the absolute refusal to even make an effort to understand the opposite point of view that's so comical here.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 19, 2024, 01:05:37 AMI wasn't intending to personally attack you, I just find the lengths you go to in order to justify something a great deal of people find absurd pretty funny. Honestly, yes, I understand your point of view since I would have made the same arguments about MNPass before it was brought into the E-ZPass system. There are probably fewer than 5,000 Minnesotans who have a semi-regular use for E-ZPass outside of Minnesota. Certainly a lot less than there are in Michigan. But it's just the absolute refusal to even make an effort to understand the opposite point of view that's so comical here.

Because I don't get the point of it when very few people crossing the bridge use it. Unless you're leaving Michigan a lot I don't see the point in having it.

If you post an opinion and other people disagree with it, the solution to that is to either defend your point of view, or to stop posting that particular opinion. The solution is not to repeatedly report the thread. I barely have enough time and energy to have my own opinions, much less to have someone else's for them.

Given the out-of-state traffic mentioned by the MBA, AET with E-ZPass compatibility is a no-brainer.

The fact that Michganders themselves don't have E-ZPass (something I find speciously supported) is rather moot.

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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Well 1. It would make it easier for those of us who do have a compatible system to EZ-Pass to use the Michigan bridges. 2. I have never been to the UP except for once and that was by Escanaba. So yes I have never used the Bridge. And it's not like I would say, "I won't go there because they are not EZ-Pass system compatible." But I would like to be able to keep my transponder total to 1.

And yes I make the same argument about other states that have toll roads and bridges that are not interoperable.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

I really didn't mean for the troll comment to come across as a personal attack—I just find the assertion incredibly ridiculous that an entirely voluntary system of HOT lanes located 325 miles from the nearest mandatory toll accepting E-ZPass has more of a reason to integrate than a mandatory toll bridge located a similar distance from a mandatory toll facility accepting E-ZPass.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

I have made plenty of good points. Many others agree with them. You either can't understand them, or simply don't want to understand them. Either way, that's on you. Keep your head buried.

Anyway the Mac bridge is a toll road. So yes, Michigan has toll roads.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

My dude, this is not a good look for you.  Traffic across the toll bridge triples in the summer months and, like I said, the MBA at least admits out of staters grow along with it.

There's no reason why AET with E-ZPass compatibility can't be instituted.

I've been across the bridge and will be again.  Got a kayaking trip I want do in the North Country.  All I know is after zipping around on every other toll road, a bridge with millions of crossings a year still taking tolls manually feels ridiculously obsolete.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 12:29:23 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

I have made plenty of good points. Many others agree with them. You either can't understand them, or simply don't want to understand them. Either way, that's on you. Keep your head buried.

Anyway the Mac bridge is a toll road. So yes, Michigan has toll roads.

It's a toll bridge not a toll road. Where are your good points at? Name them. And keep my head buried, I have no idea why you have to be so ignorant. This is a discussion forum not an argument forum and there wasn't any argument until you started attacking me just because you don't agree with what I said. That's ridiculous.

Quote from: Rothman on July 19, 2024, 01:06:10 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

My dude, this is not a good look for you.  Traffic across the toll bridge triples in the summer months and, like I said, the MBA at least admits out of staters grow along with it.

There's no reason why AET with E-ZPass compatibility can't be instituted.

I've been across the bridge and will be again.  Got a kayaking trip I want do in the North Country.  All I know is after zipping around on every other toll road, a bridge with millions of crossings a year still taking tolls manually feels ridiculously obsolete.

No kidding traffic across the bridge in the summertime picks up in volume do you think I don't know that? I have a place up north in Michigan dude, I live in Saginaw which is right along I-75 traffic from the Metro Detroit area goes up north on a Friday and down south on a Sunday all the time in the summertime. It's been like that for years I've lived in Michigan for 45 years I think I know what I'm talking about.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 01:23:59 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 19, 2024, 01:06:10 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

My dude, this is not a good look for you.  Traffic across the toll bridge triples in the summer months and, like I said, the MBA at least admits out of staters grow along with it.

There's no reason why AET with E-ZPass compatibility can't be instituted.

I've been across the bridge and will be again.  Got a kayaking trip I want do in the North Country.  All I know is after zipping around on every other toll road, a bridge with millions of crossings a year still taking tolls manually feels ridiculously obsolete.

No kidding traffic across the bridge in the summertime picks up in volume do you think I don't know that? I have a place up north in Michigan dude, I live in Saginaw which is right along I-75 traffic from the Metro Detroit area goes up north on a Friday and down south on a Sunday all the time in the summertime. It's been like that for years I've lived in Michigan for 45 years I think I know what I'm talking about.

Would you agree that for the out of staters like myself, if EZ Pass was compatible with the Mac Pass, it would lower the amount of congestion going into the toll?

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 19, 2024, 01:36:26 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 01:23:59 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 19, 2024, 01:06:10 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 11:16:31 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 19, 2024, 11:00:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Bwahahahaha!

You do have toll roads. That's why the discussion is taking place. And you SHOULD adapt EZ Pass. You have made no good points why you shouldn't.

But I guess the people running the bridge have their heads buried as far in the ground as you do.

No we do not have toll roads. Where is this toll road at? You haven't made any good points why we should have E-ZPass. Oh yeah just because the Mackinac Bridge doesn't accept E-ZPass means I have my head buried in the ground grow up dude.

My dude, this is not a good look for you.  Traffic across the toll bridge triples in the summer months and, like I said, the MBA at least admits out of staters grow along with it.

There's no reason why AET with E-ZPass compatibility can't be instituted.

I've been across the bridge and will be again.  Got a kayaking trip I want do in the North Country.  All I know is after zipping around on every other toll road, a bridge with millions of crossings a year still taking tolls manually feels ridiculously obsolete.

No kidding traffic across the bridge in the summertime picks up in volume do you think I don't know that? I have a place up north in Michigan dude, I live in Saginaw which is right along I-75 traffic from the Metro Detroit area goes up north on a Friday and down south on a Sunday all the time in the summertime. It's been like that for years I've lived in Michigan for 45 years I think I know what I'm talking about.

Would you agree that for the out of staters like myself, if EZ Pass was compatible with the Mac Pass, it would lower the amount of congestion going into the toll?

It might but it wouldn't stop the congestion on the bridge. They are constantly working on it so there is almost always a lane closed or something, I don't see how ezpass would stop that. Im not trying to argue with anyone just posting my opinions. I cross the bridge quite often myself.

I would have to agree that all electronic tolling would be a no-brainer be it EZ Pass or or some kind of system that is interoperable with all other systems in the country, which is what is supposed to happen anyways. I mean, there should be a system that should work with an Oklahoma Pike pass. It should work with everything.

Ok to be clear I understand everyone's point but I don't think it would relieve the traffic congestion especially on summer weekends. I cross the bridge about twice a month on average and always get stuck in traffic on the bridge if it's a summer weekend. But I get the reason that you people in here think they should have it and if you used the toll roads in Ohio's, Indiana and Illinois on a regular basis say once a week at the least it might be worth it to have it.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 07:36:45 PMOk to be clear I understand everyone's point but I don't think it would relieve the traffic congestion especially on summer weekends. I cross the bridge about twice a month on average and always get stuck in traffic on the bridge if it's a summer weekend. But I get the reason that you people in here think they should have it and if you used the toll roads in Ohio's, Indiana and Illinois on a regular basis say once a week at the least it might be worth it to have it.

So unless you use a toll road (a Turnpike-style road, not a bridge, although I fail to see why that distinction is useful) at least once a week, it's not worth getting?  Am I getting that right?  Because that's ridiculous.  When I went to college and inherited Mom's car, I got an E-ZPass.  Was I using the Thruway once a week?  Heck no!  But I still got it, even if I only needed to make eight trips per year between home and college, and the Thruway still took cash.  It was just that convenient.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 19, 2024, 01:36:26 PMWould you agree that for the out of staters like myself, if EZ Pass was compatible with the Mac Pass, it would lower the amount of congestion going into the toll?

It all depends on the rate of E-ZPass users. For northbound traffic, there's maybe 750 feet of distance where the highway widens to meet the tollbooths; if the backups reach the causeway, the E-ZPass holders are stuck just like the folks paying with cash or card. We could try to fudge those numbers by restricting cash/card folks to the right lane approaching the tollbooths, but such signage would have limited effectiveness. If they achieved 60% participation with E-ZPass, it would genuinely be helpful. If participation is lower, its usefulness in reducing congestion plummets.

Quote from: vdeane on July 19, 2024, 09:58:56 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 07:36:45 PMOk to be clear I understand everyone's point but I don't think it would relieve the traffic congestion especially on summer weekends. I cross the bridge about twice a month on average and always get stuck in traffic on the bridge if it's a summer weekend. But I get the reason that you people in here think they should have it and if you used the toll roads in Ohio's, Indiana and Illinois on a regular basis say once a week at the least it might be worth it to have it.

So unless you use a toll road (a Turnpike-style road, not a bridge, although I fail to see why that distinction is useful) at least once a week, it's not worth getting?  Am I getting that right?  Because that's ridiculous.  When I went to college and inherited Mom's car, I got an E-ZPass.  Was I using the Thruway once a week?  Heck no!  But I still got it, even if I only needed to make eight trips per year between home and college, and the Thruway still took cash.  It was just that convenient.

Yes to me that would be about the max it's worth of getting it. If I'm only going to use it 8 times a year I don't care about a minor inconvenience that takes less than a minute so nope I wouldn't bother getting one. It doesn't make any sense for someone like me to have EZPass.

This thread is now 4 pages of the same people saying the same stuff.

We're not saying E-ZPass only, though.  I'm talking whatever AET they want, as long as they make it compatible.

I find the assertion that removing the plaza and gates and replacing with AET and toll-by-plate to not have an effect on congestion to be totally unfounded.  One merely needs to drive the Thruway through Williamsville or heck, even take a drive over the GWB to see the drastic effects AET/Toll-by-Plate can have on congestion.

To say that traffic is going to remain the same is just irrational.

Quote from: webny99 on July 09, 2024, 11:05:40 PMI honestly don't see why EZPass couldn't work here as it does in most of the rest of the country.

Absent that, it might make sense to allow a maximum of 6 lanes in one direction instead of 5, assuming there are strong directional flows of northbound before and southbound after the holiday weekends. Even if having just two lanes creates issues in the non-peak direction, it would still ease things up on average and having the flexibility to do so never hurts.

Indiana Toll Road says Hello.

Quote from: SSOWorld on July 20, 2024, 05:54:03 AMIndiana Toll Road says Hello.

That would scare the shit out of me if it happened while I was driving on it.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 10:44:38 PMYes to me that would be about the max it's worth of getting it. If I'm only going to use it 8 times a year I don't care about a minor inconvenience that takes less than a minute so nope I wouldn't bother getting one. It doesn't make any sense for someone like me to have EZPass.

Me, I wouldn't want to inconvenience the line with the time it would take me to get out my wallet, pull out cash, and then put my wallet away.  And since I rarely use cash, factor in time for change to be made as well, if they don't take cards (although when I crossed the Blue Water Bridge, I could have put my card away then and there rather than wait for the line at customs, since it took them that long to process the card and raise the gate).

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 12:17:27 AMWe're not saying E-ZPass only, though.  I'm talking whatever AET they want, as long as they make it compatible.

I find the assertion that removing the plaza and gates and replacing with AET and toll-by-plate to not have an effect on congestion to be totally unfounded.  One merely needs to drive the Thruway through Williamsville or heck, even take a drive over the GWB to see the drastic effects AET/Toll-by-Plate can have on congestion.

To say that traffic is going to remain the same is just irrational.

I don't think most of us wanting interoperability are pushing for full AET, however.

Quote from: vdeane on July 20, 2024, 11:15:00 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 10:44:38 PMYes to me that would be about the max it's worth of getting it. If I'm only going to use it 8 times a year I don't care about a minor inconvenience that takes less than a minute so nope I wouldn't bother getting one. It doesn't make any sense for someone like me to have EZPass.

Me, I wouldn't want to inconvenience the line with the time it would take me to get out my wallet, pull out cash, and then put my wallet away.  And since I rarely use cash, factor in time for change to be made as well, if they don't take cards (although when I crossed the Blue Water Bridge, I could have put my card away then and there rather than wait for the line at customs, since it took them that long to process the card and raise the gate).

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 12:17:27 AMWe're not saying E-ZPass only, though.  I'm talking whatever AET they want, as long as they make it compatible.

I find the assertion that removing the plaza and gates and replacing with AET and toll-by-plate to not have an effect on congestion to be totally unfounded.  One merely needs to drive the Thruway through Williamsville or heck, even take a drive over the GWB to see the drastic effects AET/Toll-by-Plate can have on congestion.

To say that traffic is going to remain the same is just irrational.

I don't think most of us wanting interoperability are pushing for full AET, however.

That's a thing too, it's well known that the bridge is $4 to cross so having your money ready ahead of time is key so you wouldn't have to fiddle around with your wallet. You can use a card at the Mac, as well as Apple and Google Pay. It's been 21 years since I've been to Canada so I'm not sure about any of the International bridges other than what I would read online about them.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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).

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMHaving 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.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 12:55:54 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMHaving 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.

What the heck are they charging $88 for?

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

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 01:03:33 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 12:55:54 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMHaving 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.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 02:54:08 PMWhat 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.

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.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 03:06:20 PMSo 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.

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

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.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 20, 2024, 03:14:54 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 03:06:20 PMSo 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 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2550465,-95.9253818,3a,36.7y,351.73h,91.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPjrzOikhD-jbPHd_ygnTmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu) and thought this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7939484,-95.7797474,3a,40.3y,349.08h,87.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snp05sVvwl5N6S9thRHtJ3Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu) was acceptable well into the 21st century, maybe it should be considered that they have room for improvement.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 20, 2024, 03:32:08 PMWhy 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.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 20, 2024, 06:13:03 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 20, 2024, 03:32:08 PMWhy 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.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 02:54:08 PMWhat 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.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 20, 2024, 02:55:25 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 01:03:33 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 12:55:54 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMHaving 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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMThey 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.

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 08:59:10 PMAs 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.

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 08:33:06 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

Quote from: vdeane on July 20, 2024, 09:05:58 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PMThey 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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 08:00:10 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

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.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 21, 2024, 09:12:33 AMThe 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...

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 08:28:13 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2024, 02:54:08 PMWhat 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?

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 21, 2024, 09:05:45 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 08:00:10 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

Okay, how many Michigan residents even know what EZPass is?  I'm guessing 5-10% tops.  Virtually, nobody here knows what it is, because there is no need for it and virtually nobody uses it.  Other than the Mackinac Bridge, all other tolls are for border crossings into Canada, where you're going to have backups with or without EZPass. 

Even the MBA admits that 5% of the MacPass customer base has at least one other transponder. Considering the $88 upfront cost for MacPass that makes adopting it impractical for all but daily or semi-daily crossers, I don't think this figure is insignificant. After all, it is a little over 300 miles from the nearest E-ZPass toll plaza.
https://x.com/mackinacbridge/status/1330860808050511872

Since Yoopers and other locals are more than likely overrepresented, I would say that the further south you go, the more people will have E-ZPass for out-of-state travel. Of course it is also true that the further south you go, the less people will cross the bridge on a regular basis outside of these holidays where congestion is more frequent. But obviously, the MBA did not have infrequent crossers in mind when they created the MacPass. At the very least, they should require significantly less for a balance payment.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 21, 2024, 09:05:45 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 08:00:10 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

I was just using the numbers other people threw out.  If anything, using your figures only further proves my point.  If we assume the volumes on the peak travel days are double the 12k, that would be 24k on those days, very comfortable with two lanes each way on the bridge.  Therefore, the bridge can't be the cause of the congestion, it must be the toll booth.

Even a 5 second stop adds up quickly with enough volume, but I'm betting that for many people it's more than 5 seconds.  5 seconds assumes you have four $1 bills set out beforehand.  I don't even have $1 bills in my wallet; I'd need to use a credit card or break a $20.  Or see if they happen to take any of the Canadian cash I have around; I have better bill variety in CAD than USD due to buying a roll from AAA prior to my Montréal trip this year.

And why should the truck speed limit be that low?  I can't even think of any other bridges that even have a truck speed limit.  And quite frankly, I don't understand why many major bridges have lower limits than the roadway on either side despite the roadway geometry not demanding a lower limit.

And now that you're using monthly averages for everything makes me think that your position is essentially "backups across the bridge on the summer holiday weekends are perfectly acceptable".  And like others said, you seem to be finding every reason possible for it to not be interoperable.  Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I would figure that your position boils down to "I need a good reason to support interoperability" while the rest of us are "I need a good reason to be OK with it not being interoperable", but with how vehemently you've been digging your heels in, that might be too generous.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 21, 2024, 07:32:05 PMEven the MBA admits that 5% of the MacPass customer base has at least one other transponder. Considering the $88 upfront cost for MacPass that makes adopting it impractical for all but daily or semi-daily crossers, I don't think this figure is insignificant. After all, it is a little over 300 miles from the nearest E-ZPass toll plaza.
https://x.com/mackinacbridge/status/1330860808050511872

Since Yoopers and other locals are more than likely overrepresented, I would say that the further south you go, the more people will have E-ZPass for out-of-state travel. Of course it is also true that the further south you go, the less people will cross the bridge on a regular basis outside of these holidays where congestion is more frequent. But obviously, the MBA did not have infrequent crossers in mind when they created the MacPass. At the very least, they should require significantly less for a balance payment.

I'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 21, 2024, 09:05:45 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 08:00:10 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

I was just using the numbers other people threw out.  If anything, using your figures only further proves my point.  If we assume the volumes on the peak travel days are double the 12k, that would be 24k on those days, very comfortable with two lanes each way on the bridge.  Therefore, the bridge can't be the cause of the congestion, it must be the toll booth.

Even a 5 second stop adds up quickly with enough volume, but I'm betting that for many people it's more than 5 seconds.  5 seconds assumes you have four $1 bills set out beforehand.  I don't even have $1 bills in my wallet; I'd need to use a credit card or break a $20.  Or see if they happen to take any of the Canadian cash I have around; I have better bill variety in CAD than USD due to buying a roll from AAA prior to my Montréal trip this year.

And why should the truck speed limit be that low?  I can't even think of any other bridges that even have a truck speed limit.  And quite frankly, I don't understand why many major bridges have lower limits than the roadway on either side despite the roadway geometry not demanding a lower limit.

And now that you're using monthly averages for everything makes me think that your position is essentially "backups across the bridge on the summer holiday weekends are perfectly acceptable".  And like others said, you seem to be finding every reason possible for it to not be interoperable.  Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I would figure that your position boils down to "I need a good reason to support interoperability" while the rest of us are "I need a good reason to be OK with it not being interoperable", but with how vehemently you've been digging your heels in, that might be too generous.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 21, 2024, 07:32:05 PMEven the MBA admits that 5% of the MacPass customer base has at least one other transponder. Considering the $88 upfront cost for MacPass that makes adopting it impractical for all but daily or semi-daily crossers, I don't think this figure is insignificant. After all, it is a little over 300 miles from the nearest E-ZPass toll plaza.
https://x.com/mackinacbridge/status/1330860808050511872

Since Yoopers and other locals are more than likely overrepresented, I would say that the further south you go, the more people will have E-ZPass for out-of-state travel. Of course it is also true that the further south you go, the less people will cross the bridge on a regular basis outside of these holidays where congestion is more frequent. But obviously, the MBA did not have infrequent crossers in mind when they created the MacPass. At the very least, they should require significantly less for a balance payment.

I'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Good luck getting both lanes open for the entire length of the bridge when on going construction is always happening on the bridge, the MBA almost always has a lane closed for maintenance or construction. So when you are behind a 20 mph moving truck in a single lane there is going to be congestion. Truck speed is 20 mph because they are carrying 60,000 pounds or more and the wind is a factor as well. This is a bridge that is almost 70 years old that is not up to Interstate highway standards and never will be we are talking about.

^^^ with that attitude, you're certainly correct.

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PMI'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Is it possible they looked at it through the lens of supplementing EZPass with MacPass and not simply eliminating MacPass altogether? That could be why that cost seems high if they have to install a whole bunch of new equipment. There would be at least still IT costs involved to link the softwares. I don't know.

The one thing I will say is keep in mind you're not dealing with a toll authority the size of NYS, PTC, ISTHA, etc. The 2022 figures showed the bridge made $23 million, with a $94 million multi-year maintenance project kicking off this year. Dropping a million bucks on something that would be nice-to-have but hardly essential or critical to the bridge's operation is going to be a tough sell for any industry.

I'm not anti-interoperability, I'm just suggesting why it may not be a priority for them. Should it be? A lot of people here think so. I don't know. I'm not in charge.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 22, 2024, 04:00:12 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PMI'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Is it possible they looked at it through the lens of supplementing EZPass with MacPass and not simply eliminating MacPass altogether? That could be why that cost seems high if they have to install a whole bunch of new equipment. There would be at least still IT costs involved to link the softwares. I don't know.

The one thing I will say is keep in mind you're not dealing with a toll authority the size of NYS, PTC, ISTHA, etc. The 2022 figures showed the bridge made $23 million, with a $94 million multi-year maintenance project kicking off this year. Dropping a million bucks on something that would be nice-to-have but hardly essential or critical to the bridge's operation is going to be a tough sell for any industry.

I'm not anti-interoperability, I'm just suggesting why it may not be a priority for them. Should it be? A lot of people here think so. I don't know. I'm not in charge.

The Thousand Islands Bridge Authority managed to join, and while they don't have a separate RFID sticker, multiple E-ZPass agencies now issue stickers (Illinois exclusively now), so I can't imagine they don't have both types of equipment.

Another thing is in high winds the speed limit is 20 mph for every vehicle and high winds in the Straits area is not uncommon at all. In fact it's very common for high winds. You are 200 feet above the water at the midpoint of the bridge, the bridge is 5 miles long and two narrow lanes in each direction. I can't believe that anyone would question the 20 mph speed limit for trucks carrying over 60,000 pounds on the bridge.

Quote from: vdeane on July 22, 2024, 06:48:06 AM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 22, 2024, 04:00:12 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PMI'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Is it possible they looked at it through the lens of supplementing EZPass with MacPass and not simply eliminating MacPass altogether? That could be why that cost seems high if they have to install a whole bunch of new equipment. There would be at least still IT costs involved to link the softwares. I don't know.

The one thing I will say is keep in mind you're not dealing with a toll authority the size of NYS, PTC, ISTHA, etc. The 2022 figures showed the bridge made $23 million, with a $94 million multi-year maintenance project kicking off this year. Dropping a million bucks on something that would be nice-to-have but hardly essential or critical to the bridge's operation is going to be a tough sell for any industry.

I'm not anti-interoperability, I'm just suggesting why it may not be a priority for them. Should it be? A lot of people here think so. I don't know. I'm not in charge.

The Thousand Islands Bridge Authority managed to join, and while they don't have a separate RFID sticker, multiple E-ZPass agencies now issue stickers (Illinois exclusively now), so I can't imagine they don't have both types of equipment.

And the Thousand Islands area is in New York where more people have EZPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority has explained their reason and it's a valid reason.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 22, 2024, 08:59:25 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 22, 2024, 06:48:06 AM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 22, 2024, 04:00:12 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PMI'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Is it possible they looked at it through the lens of supplementing EZPass with MacPass and not simply eliminating MacPass altogether? That could be why that cost seems high if they have to install a whole bunch of new equipment. There would be at least still IT costs involved to link the softwares. I don't know.

The one thing I will say is keep in mind you're not dealing with a toll authority the size of NYS, PTC, ISTHA, etc. The 2022 figures showed the bridge made $23 million, with a $94 million multi-year maintenance project kicking off this year. Dropping a million bucks on something that would be nice-to-have but hardly essential or critical to the bridge's operation is going to be a tough sell for any industry.

I'm not anti-interoperability, I'm just suggesting why it may not be a priority for them. Should it be? A lot of people here think so. I don't know. I'm not in charge.

The Thousand Islands Bridge Authority managed to join, and while they don't have a separate RFID sticker, multiple E-ZPass agencies now issue stickers (Illinois exclusively now), so I can't imagine they don't have both types of equipment.

And the Thousand Islands area is in New York where more people have EZPass. The Mackinac Bridge Authority has explained their reason and it's a valid reason.

From the perspective of having just spent the money to upgrade from the card system, yes. But the figures I'm more interested in are what it would have cost to implement E-ZPass from the beginning instead of creating their own separate system. The answer is not likely much, and this was more about corporate greed and control than actually saving money.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 08:33:06 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

So do you think there is enough reason to have a twin span bridge?

I still don't see the harm in implementing AET, MacPass/E-ZPass compatible, if not even more systems.

The maintenance program is certainly an intriguing one.  Still, with congestion on the bridge, raising tolls modestly could pay for the conversion and maintenance.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 22, 2024, 09:51:43 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 08:33:06 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

So do you think there is enough reason to have a twin span bridge?

How many billions would that cost and where would you put it?

Quote from: Rothman on July 22, 2024, 11:28:50 AMI still don't see the harm in implementing AET, MacPass/E-ZPass compatible, if not even more systems.

The maintenance program is certainly an intriguing one.  Still, with congestion on the bridge, raising tolls modestly could pay for the conversion and maintenance.

Plus they could offer a discounted rate for those using MacPasses (beyond the current return trip within 36 hours discount) to encourage a continued revenue stream from that.

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 22, 2024, 12:28:06 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 22, 2024, 09:51:43 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 08:33:06 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

So do you think there is enough reason to have a twin span bridge?

How many billions would that cost and where would you put it?

If you go upthread, I did post about this before. Put the twin span east of the current one. It cost $99.8 Million for the originial span. That is $828 Million in 2023 money.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PMCongestion 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.

Poor weather is outside of our (or the Bridge Authority's) control. Ditto for construction, though the Authority can at least try to keep major work outside the heavy travel days during the Memorial Day -> Labor Day period.

As for trucks, the State Police should enforce the truck restriction to the right lane only. Of course, if a convoy of double-wide trailer homes decides to choose a random Monday evening to make the crossing and block both lanes (as I'm watching right now on the Bridge cam), not much they can do with that one.

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 08:00:10 AMAs 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.

That 20K AADT is during the peak summer travel period (extrapolated from the monthly crossing figures). On peak days, I wouldn't be surprised to see it crack 40,000 vpd, but that's at the absolute limits of the tolling infrastructure. Unfortunately the Bridge only publishes montly figures.

60K AADT is pure fantasy unless they simply waived tolls altogether.

They're not moving trucks (and RVs and travel trailers) any faster over the bridge than they are already. The Bridge is not Interstate-spec. The lanes are narrow. The guardrails are precariously low. The Bridge isn't built to handle the added weight of taller guardrails.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 22, 2024, 04:00:12 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 21, 2024, 07:54:40 PMI'd be very curious why they think it would cost that much and require additional staff.  Makes me wonder if they're running a patronage operation like a certain bridge near NYC that resisted E-ZPass for many years.  They're basically a clone of Flint1979.

Is it possible they looked at it through the lens of supplementing EZPass with MacPass and not simply eliminating MacPass altogether? That could be why that cost seems high if they have to install a whole bunch of new equipment. There would be at least still IT costs involved to link the softwares. I don't know.

The one thing I will say is keep in mind you're not dealing with a toll authority the size of NYS, PTC, ISTHA, etc. The 2022 figures showed the bridge made $23 million, with a $94 million multi-year maintenance project kicking off this year. Dropping a million bucks on something that would be nice-to-have but hardly essential or critical to the bridge's operation is going to be a tough sell for any industry.

That's one reason I haven't really pushed E-ZPass as *the* answer. Limited users, a lot of upfront costs and ongoing costs, and it's not clear it would markedly improve the Authority's finances without including a hike in tolls.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 22, 2024, 03:02:34 PM

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 22, 2024, 12:28:06 PM

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 22, 2024, 09:51:43 AMSo do you think there is enough reason to have a twin span bridge?

How many billions would that cost and where would you put it?

If you go upthread, I did post about this before. Put the twin span east of the current one. It cost $99.8 Million for the originial span. That is $828 Million in 2023 money.

That's assuming they build a clone of the existing bridge. They would have to build to modern specs today, so you can easily double or triple that figure. If we're talking about things that AIN'T EVER GONNA HAPPEN, it's twinning the Mackinac Bridge.

The Bridge Authority's going to keep the existing Bridge going as long as they possibly can. Short of a cataclysmic failure of one of the two towers, there's no reason they couldn't get another 75 years out of it. If the Mouron family's half-assed maintenance on the Ambassador Bridge was enough to get it to 100, no reason the Mackinac Bridge couldn't live to 150. 

When they're forced to build a new span, it'll most likely be a replacement span - and maybe at that point it'll be 6 lanes with full inner and outer shoulders.

Quote from: hobsini2 on July 22, 2024, 09:51:43 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 11:20:31 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 20, 2024, 08:33:06 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 20, 2024, 12:49:36 PM

Quote from: rhen_var on July 20, 2024, 12:40:14 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 19, 2024, 09:56:10 AMWe 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.

So do you think there is enough reason to have a twin span bridge?

No

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 22, 2024, 07:56:22 PMThat's one reason I haven't really pushed E-ZPass as *the* answer. Limited users, a lot of upfront costs and ongoing costs, and it's not clear it would markedly improve the Authority's finances without including a hike in tolls.

I really think the MBA had tunnel vision during the decision making process for the switch to transponder technology, opting to just continue the business model that only works for locals and not looking closer into business models for MacPass that would be more attractive to weekenders or occasional crossers in order to speed up some of the traffic at the toll booths. Even a $48 pricetag for the MacPass, plus a better deal on all crossings rather than just return trips within 36 hours would make it more attractive for occasional users--especially if they know they will be crossing on these high-traffic holidays.

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 22, 2024, 07:56:22 PMWhen they're forced to build a new span, it'll most likely be a replacement span - and maybe at that point it'll be 6 lanes with full inner and outer shoulders.

We'll have flying cars before the bridge will be replaced.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 22, 2024, 10:21:06 PM

Quote from: JREwing78 on July 22, 2024, 07:56:22 PMThat's one reason I haven't really pushed E-ZPass as *the* answer. Limited users, a lot of upfront costs and ongoing costs, and it's not clear it would markedly improve the Authority's finances without including a hike in tolls.

I really think the MBA had tunnel vision during the decision making process for the switch to transponder technology, opting to just continue the business model that only works for locals and not looking closer into business models for MacPass that would be more attractive to weekenders or occasional crossers in order to speed up some of the traffic at the toll booths. Even a $48 pricetag for the MacPass, plus a better deal on all crossings rather than just return trips within 36 hours would make it more attractive for occasional users--especially if they know they will be crossing on these high-traffic holidays.

It is amazing how often organizations will go for "replace in kind" when "modernizing" something rather than looking at what actually makes sense in the present day.

I need to find where I saw it.. it was a study. Michigan did it as a worst case if some sort of catastrophe would befall the Mackinac Bridge. 

A replacement span would be not the preferred option. Mostly due to the risks of construction in the weather there. The study (if I remember right) recommended a series of tunnels and causeways using Bois Blanc island and the various shoals in the straights.. with tunnels on ether side of the island.

It was still stupidly expensive even in the 18 to 20 years ago money it quoted. And this included money to divert I-75 much farther eastward.

From memory, and this is foogy..
Tunnel from the lower Peninsula to Pine Reef Light
A causeway from the light to the island.
Road across the island.
Tunnel from the north end of the island to Majors Shoal where a artificial island would be built.
It would dip back down into a third tunnel to Graham Shoal there it would connect via a causeway to the existing north side toll Plaza.

Mackinac island was absolutely to be avoided at all costs, it would shorten the tunnels, but at the cost of destroying the character of the no cars allowed island.

And yes.. the bridge gets just nasty to try and cross in the winter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44T958q1y-s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcjj3-v0jB4

I see the chances being about zero that Michigan could theoretically build that route now in today's fiscal and environmental climates.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 25, 2024, 08:40:23 PMI see the chances being about zero that Michigan could theoretically build that route now in today's fiscal and environmental climates.

To be honest, I think that would go for absolutely any replacement, even a new span next to it.

Which is why they maintain the heck out of the existing bridge. I mean they spend a good bit of money on it.

In 2017 they spent $6.7 million on operations, and 8 million dollars on "Infrastructure Preservation"

The Mackinac Bridge is such a major icon of Michigan, I'd have to believe if it were suddenly destroyed it would have to be replaced in kind just for that reason alone.

Of course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I wonder how much a new bridge would cost today? I mean, it would have to be in the billions.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 26, 2024, 12:46:21 PMI wonder how much a new bridge would cost today? I mean, it would have to be in the billions.

Not only that, but from my foggy memory. The gist of why they went with tunnels in the study was (even in the late 90s when this was done) They could be built with precast parts that could be sunk and covered and unflooded. While someone else built the road segments, and a third party worked on the causeways and island. In probably less time then a bridge replacement.

A new bridge construction would have to deal with five (Or more) years of construction in weather that is often downright hostile. And worksite conditions they were okay in the 50s, would not fly 50 years later, so the construction was going to likely be much longer than the original bridge.

Even then the study stressed the best alternative was preservation of the existing span indefinitely was a far better option then anything else.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 26, 2024, 12:46:21 PMI wonder how much a new bridge would cost today? I mean, it would have to be in the billions.

Well it was like $96 million in the 1950's so yeah probably just over a billion today.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Bwahahahaha....

You are so silly.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:11:26 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Bwahahahaha....

You are so silly.

Yeah I'm the one that's silly but you mentioned me again after having attacked me in this thread. What is your problem? Oh I don't agree that the Mackinac Bridge should have EZ-Pass? Really? Grow up.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:15:24 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:11:26 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Bwahahahaha....

You are so silly.

Yeah I'm the one that's silly but you mentioned me again after having attacked me in this thread. What is your problem? Oh I don't agree that the Mackinac Bridge should have EZ-Pass? Really? Grow up.

"Attacked" you?  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Are you really this humorless? 

Let's see, posts #152 and 155 in this thread most certainly attacked me. You people don't even know what you are talking about anyway, I don't care how many people on here agree with you.

Oh and #226 was attempting to attack me as well when I hadn't said a word to you in several pages but oh here you are trying to stir the pot.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:56:50 PMLet's see, posts #152 and 155 in this thread most certainly attacked me. You people don't even know what you are talking about anyway, I don't care how many people on here agree with you.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:59:31 PMOh and #226 was attempting to attack me as well when I hadn't said a word to you in several pages but oh here you are trying to stir the pot.

Yikes. Probably best for you to turn in for the night. Cause this is kind of embarrassing.

Wake up tomorrow with a more positive approach OK?

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 11:03:23 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:56:50 PMLet's see, posts #152 and 155 in this thread most certainly attacked me. You people don't even know what you are talking about anyway, I don't care how many people on here agree with you.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:59:31 PMOh and #226 was attempting to attack me as well when I hadn't said a word to you in several pages but oh here you are trying to stir the pot.

Yikes. Probably best for you to turn in for the night. Cause this is kind of embarrassing.

Wake up tomorrow with a more positive approach OK?

What's embarrassing? Not a damn thing. You can turn in for the night and wake up tomorrow with a more positive approach because you have not made no positive approach here.

You are the one that mentioned me and I replied and now your mad. Like I told you earlier, grow up. The Mackinac Bridge will most likely never have EZ-Pass because there is no benefit in getting it. You people think the lack of it causes backups on the bridge, it does not. The bridge is two lanes in each direction, often with a lane closed for maintenance or construction the toll plaza not accepting EZ-Pass is not the reason for any backups on the bridge. Then you say that I haven't given a valid reason why they shouldn't have it, I have been doing that the entire thread.

Oy vey.  SMH.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:15:24 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:11:26 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Bwahahahaha....

You are so silly.

Yeah I'm the one that's silly but you mentioned me again after having attacked me in this thread. What is your problem? Oh I don't agree that the Mackinac Bridge should have EZ-Pass? Really? Grow up.

You are really coming off as a troll here. You just won't let go of the EZ Pass thing. That was brought up as an example of what could be used for the bridge. The overall tone or insinuation that I think most people are agreeing on this thread is that electronic tolling should be implemented that is also interoperable with other agencies. And nobody is attacking you.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 11:32:04 PMYou are the one that mentioned me and I replied and now your mad. Like I told you earlier, grow up. The Mackinac Bridge will most likely never have EZ-Pass because there is no benefit in getting it. You people think the lack of it causes backups on the bridge, it does not. The bridge is two lanes in each direction, often with a lane closed for maintenance or construction the toll plaza not accepting EZ-Pass is not the reason for any backups on the bridge. Then you say that I haven't given a valid reason why they shouldn't have it, I have been doing that the entire thread.

1. No you haven't. I decided days ago not to debate this any longer because you are simply being stubborn.

2. I'm not mad...at all. I am laughing at how personally you are taking was just a quip of a joke. Instead of letting something like that just roll off your back, you claim you are being "attacked." Which is wild.

Anyway, hope you had a good nights sleep. I sure did.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 02:02:54 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:15:24 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:11:26 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 26, 2024, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 10:50:57 AMOf course it would be replaced. The economic health of the UP depends on it for tourism and access to the border, the universities up there, etc.

Which also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

I haven't said a word to you. Wtf are you trying to start?

Bwahahahaha....

You are so silly.

Yeah I'm the one that's silly but you mentioned me again after having attacked me in this thread. What is your problem? Oh I don't agree that the Mackinac Bridge should have EZ-Pass? Really? Grow up.

You are really coming off as a troll here. You just won't let go of the EZ Pass thing. That was brought up as an example of what could be used for the bridge. The overall tone or insinuation that I think most people are agreeing on this thread is that electronic tolling should be implemented that is also interoperable with other agencies. And nobody is attacking you.

Yeah because everyone on this thread are the know all of the Mackinac Bridge. You know everything about the Mackinac Bridge and I know nothing. That's what you are doing here. I cross the Mackinac Bridge multiple times a year and am pretty sure I know more about crossing the Mackinac Bridge than some random people on an internet forum that don't even live anywhere near the bridge.

"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

I cross the bridge more than a few times a year more like about 60-70 times. I know the bridge pretty well. Why can't you people come to terms that the toll plaza isn't the reason for backups at the Mackinac Bridge?

Ok, time for some reality here. I'm a Yooper here and have family in the Northern Lower in the Straits Area. I attended college and lived downstate for several years. I've crossed the Mackinac Bridge hundreds of times, including as many as four times in a single day. I've been under it on a boat, walked it on Labor Day, been to the top of the south tower, and crossed it in cars, trucks, school busses, and charter busses. I've also applied for a job with the MBA.

I have an I-Pass. I got it when I lived in the Grand Rapids area because I expected to be visiting Chicago more often. I've used it more frequently on non-ISTHA roads, but I can go many years without using it. Most of the time though, it just sits on my windshield doing nothing. It's convenient when I get to use it, but it's mostly like having a foreign credit card that isn't unless I'm out of the country.

If the I-Pass worked at the Bridge, that would be a bit more convenient. I wouldn't save much time at the toll booth though. Those toll takers are very quick handling cash. It's even faster now that the toll is $4.00; things were slower when it was $1.50 or $2.50 because of the coins involved in the transactions. Those toll takers hold bundles of bills in their hands and make change very quickly without using their cash drawers.

I've looked at MacPass, and I think people here are confusing it for a general ETC program like E-ZPass/I-Pass. It's the replacement for the NFC cards that were a replacement for tokens. It is also the replacement for the commuter program so that commuters no longer have to request and save receipts to claim the free crossing within 36 hours. It's intended to be a local program for locals. Could it be more? Maybe.

The MBA has studied expanding MacPass and joining E-ZPass. For the authority, the economics don't seem to work for them. All of the armchair pontificating here will not replace that determination. They know the specifics on why it would cost too much for them to implement absent an actual requirement to do so. I'm sure that they continue to evaluate the situation, and if things change, they will make a change.

Personally, given the interoperability mandate, I think it was short-sighted to intentionally create an incompatible pass after the mandate's effective date. There's no enforcement to that mandate though, so they're getting away with it. Then again, the MacPass sticker transponders may be technically interoperable with what ISTHA is deploying for I-Pass, so they may have moved in a parallel direction toward future interoperability when and if the economics or the regulatory environment change.

Now, what the out-of-staters don't get. AET/ETC will not eliminate congestion at the bridge. Full stop. Much of this year's congestion is based on construction bottlenecks. You have a four-lane bridge that's effectively a two-lane bridge much of the time. Prime tourist traffic season is prime construction season. There's almost always a full or partial lane closed in each direction. When the trucks have a 20 mph speed limit and a lane is closed, the bridge backs up some. That is a fact of life. That's not even counting the times when they have to reduce speed limits or even implement escorts due to high winds. Sometimes, they even have to close the bridge completely due to winds or other weather.

Last fall, there was work on the US 2 interchange just north of the bridge that caused backups on I-75 and US 2 getting to the toll plaza southbound and eastbound. There was also construction on the causeway section of the bridge, narrowing it to a single lane in each direction. That's why I was stuck in traffic in St. Ignace for 45 minutes last fall. Nothing connected to how the tolls were processed would have changed that wait time. NOTHING. The toll takers were waiting for the traffic to clear the lanes to have the next vehicle approach; traffic was not waiting for the person in the booth.

Yeah, I've been through the toll plaza when they could have used a few more booths open to handle a surge in traffic, just as I've been to Walmart when they needed to call up cashiers to handle an unplanned rush. By and large though, the most congestion at the bridge isn't from the toll plaza in my experience.

The construction on the causeway and interchange backed up northbound traffic as well, so switching to toll collection in a single direction would not have expedited traffic. Once I got south of the causeway, traffic flowed normally on the bridge. On my return trip, once I got past the interchange, traffic flowed freely.

The only way to decrease congestion on the bridge is to expand the lanes or eliminate on-going maintenance of the span. Changing the payment method or eliminating tolling wouldn't change that reality.

^^^^ that is a very reasonable and well put discussion point. Thank you for adding to that. That makes much more sense than what the other guys saying that he's some expert on this bridge, getting hung up on the EZPASS, And claiming that nothing needs to be done.

Now I've never even been in the state of Michigan, but this thread has got me so interested about the subject. I'm gonna contact the department of transportation up there and ask for their reasoning of not implementing all electronic tolling.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 01:19:37 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

I cross the bridge more than a few times a year more like about 60-70 times. I know the bridge pretty well. Why can't you people come to terms that the toll plaza isn't the reason for backups at the Mackinac Bridge?

Why can't you just come to terms with implementing all electronic tolling is just something that could help to some degree? On days when traffic isn't backed up, it would still allow for people to proceed without having to stop. Anyway, you look at it it's more efficient.

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

(https://media1.tenor.com/m/yASL5xTfDWwAAAAC/wedding-crashers-why-are-you-yelling-at-me.gif)

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:26:13 PM^^^^ that is a very reasonable and well put discussion point. Thank you for adding to that. That makes much more sense than what the other guys saying that he's some expert on this bridge, getting hung up on the EZPASS, And claiming that nothing needs to be done.

Now I've never even been in the state of Michigan, but this thread has got me so interested about the subject. I'm gonna contact the department of transportation up there and ask for their reasoning of not implementing all electronic tolling.

If you are talking about me I have never claimed to be an expert at anything.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:28:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 01:19:37 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

I cross the bridge more than a few times a year more like about 60-70 times. I know the bridge pretty well. Why can't you people come to terms that the toll plaza isn't the reason for backups at the Mackinac Bridge?

Why can't you just come to terms with implementing all electronic tolling is just something that could help to some degree? On days when traffic isn't backed up, it would still allow for people to proceed without having to stop. Anyway, you look at it it's more efficient.

Not really and that is why I don't agree with it. It's not going to stop congestion on the bridge. It might be a bit more convenient but that's about it.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

It's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:05:23 PMIt's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Great and imagine if there was all electronic tolling where people didn't have to stop at all. If you can do something to make it just that more efficient why not do it?

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:44:09 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

(https://media1.tenor.com/m/yASL5xTfDWwAAAAC/wedding-crashers-why-are-you-yelling-at-me.gif)

I'm not yelling. I'm just trying to spell it out very clearly because it seems like a couple people here are so hung up on the EZPass thing.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:03:25 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

Someone else brought up locking the thread and I'm just saying I would agree because this doesn't seem like a very productive conversation. But that's none of my business.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:20:12 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:05:23 PMIt's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Great and imagine if there was all electronic tolling where people didn't have to stop at all. If you can do something to make it just that more efficient why not do it?

So stopping for a whole 5 seconds is going to matter?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:21:53 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:03:25 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

Someone else brought up locking the thread and I'm just saying I would agree because this doesn't seem like a very productive conversation. But that's none of my business.

It hasn't gone off topic

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:27:55 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:20:12 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:05:23 PMIt's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Great and imagine if there was all electronic tolling where people didn't have to stop at all. If you can do something to make it just that more efficient why not do it?

So stopping for a whole 5 seconds is going to matter?

Yes

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 11:32:04 PMYou are the one that mentioned me and I replied and now your mad. Like I told you earlier, grow up. The Mackinac Bridge will most likely never have EZ-Pass because there is no benefit in getting it. You people think the lack of it causes backups on the bridge, it does not. The bridge is two lanes in each direction, often with a lane closed for maintenance or construction the toll plaza not accepting EZ-Pass is not the reason for any backups on the bridge. Then you say that I haven't given a valid reason why they shouldn't have it, I have been doing that the entire thread.

I think there's a fundamental difference in the mode of thought for you and those of us who think they should be interoperable.  You seem to think that unless interoperability would eliminate bridge congestion, then it should not be done and MacPass should remain separate.  The rest of us think that interoperability should happen even if it would have no effect on congestion.  At all.  Now, I question whether that would really be the case (I would think there would at least be a small change), but it doesn't change our position one bit because our position doesn't hinge on eliminating congestion being a requirement for being interoperable with E-ZPass.

There's actually a mode of thought on this, about whether things are worth doing if they only partially solve a problem, but I think I'll leave it at that, given that the YouTube videos and articles I've seen on this normally reference much more political contexts to explain why certain groups of voters think the way they do about the issues.

That said, I think more Michigan drivers have E-ZPass and use toll roads than you estimate.  When driving back from the Michigan City roadmeet, I encountered multiple Michigan drivers on both the Thruway and Ohio Turnpike.  One didn't have a transponder, one appeared to be a rental, but the others?  They had E-ZPass.  And one of them was even on the Toledo-Cleveland stretch (not the rental, either).  I guess not everyone is as avid a shunpiker as you are.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 01:19:37 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

I cross the bridge more than a few times a year more like about 60-70 times. I know the bridge pretty well. Why can't you people come to terms that the toll plaza isn't the reason for backups at the Mackinac Bridge?

OK, I was going to compare you being stubborn to my parents who refused to get E-ZPass until the Thruway went AET, and then I saw this.  Wow.  Even assuming that's one-way and not round trip, you're pretty much the target customer of MacPass (as opposed to my parents, who only travel the Thruway a fraction of the times per year you cross the bridge, and mostly on the 44-45 stretch, whose 20 cent cash toll was much smaller than the $4 bridge toll).  Yeah, you're just stubborn.  The question you need to answer is, why should you being stubborn affect the rest of us.  You don't want to use E-ZPass?  Fine, you can choose not to.  But you being stubborn has no legitimate bearing on whether MacPass and E-ZPass should become compatible with each other.  None.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMIf the I-Pass worked at the Bridge, that would be a bit more convenient. I wouldn't save much time at the toll booth though. Those toll takers are very quick handling cash. It's even faster now that the toll is $4.00; things were slower when it was $1.50 or $2.50 because of the coins involved in the transactions. Those toll takers hold bundles of bills in their hands and make change very quickly without using their cash drawers.

This sheds some light on the credit card issue mentioned upthread.  If they're holding rolls of bills expecting to just accept $4 or make change for a larger denomination bill, then getting handed a credit card probably throws them off their rhythm (especially if they need to insert cards and don't do tap to pay).  Contrast the Blue Water Bridge, where the toll taker had the credit card reader held out before I could even roll down my window and grab my card.  It took longer for the toll taker to look at the reader and see the transaction was approved and lift the gate than it did to tap my card and have it process.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMThe MBA has studied expanding MacPass and joining E-ZPass. For the authority, the economics don't seem to work for them. All of the armchair pontificating here will not replace that determination. They know the specifics on why it would cost too much for them to implement absent an actual requirement to do so. I'm sure that they continue to evaluate the situation, and if things change, they will make a change.

Personally, given the interoperability mandate, I think it was short-sighted to intentionally create an incompatible pass after the mandate's effective date. There's no enforcement to that mandate though, so they're getting away with it. Then again, the MacPass sticker transponders may be technically interoperable with what ISTHA is deploying for I-Pass, so they may have moved in a parallel direction toward future interoperability when and if the economics or the regulatory environment change.

Yes, this.  Do I expect that the bridge will actually become interoperable any time soon?  No.  Even SunPass took years, and FDOT actually supported it.  As for why they say it costs so much, I'm curious if there's a business process reason behind it.  It could easily be "we have some strange procedure that only we do and which we'd have to change to make this work properly so instead we'd try to awkwardly graft it onto what we do now even though it would take much more time and money to do that", which isn't a good thing to say, but is very common in government.

And I really do scratch my head on why they created their own system after the interoperability mandate deadline instead of just joining E-ZPass.  I suspect it's because they were asking the wrong question when they made it, looking just for a modern way to implement their NFC tag and commuter program, not for what would make sense for travelers today building from the ground up.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMNow, what the out-of-staters don't get. AET/ETC will not eliminate congestion at the bridge. Full stop. Much of this year's congestion is based on construction bottlenecks. You have a four-lane bridge that's effectively a two-lane bridge much of the time. Prime tourist traffic season is prime construction season. There's almost always a full or partial lane closed in each direction. When the trucks have a 20 mph speed limit and a lane is closed, the bridge backs up some. That is a fact of life. That's not even counting the times when they have to reduce speed limits or even implement escorts due to high winds. Sometimes, they even have to close the bridge completely due to winds or other weather.

I'm curious about the AADT figures Flint gave upthread, because he made it sound like even peak travel days wouldn't break 20k vehicles, which is low enough that an equivalent four-lane surface road would get a road diet.  But I do question whether that 20 mph speed limit for trucks is needed 24/7/365.  Could they improve things by making the speed limits variable, letting trucks go the full 45 mph when conditions allow and lowering it to 20 only when needed?

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 05:07:43 PMI'm curious about the AADT figures Flint gave upthread, because he made it sound like even peak travel days wouldn't break 20k vehicles, which is low enough that an equivalent four-lane surface road would get a road diet.  But I do question whether that 20 mph speed limit for trucks is needed 24/7/365.  Could they improve things by making the speed limits variable, letting trucks go the full 45 mph when conditions allow and lowering it to 20 only when needed?

There are safety reasons why trucks are limited to that speed all the time. In short, that limit is always needed on the bridge given the heights and winds experienced in the Straits. The center span can shift as much as 25 feet laterally depending on wind intensity. They do have variable speed limits now in the sense that if the winds pick up enough, cars drop to 20 or 25 mph. Other measures taken include escorting or limiting high-profile vehicles and finally closing the span completely. I find it very unlikely that they'd allow semis to go faster, ever.

In fact:

QuoteHigh Wind Warning
Saturday, Jul 27 - 5:16 PM

Currently we are experiencing winds of sufficient force in the Straits area (20 - 34 mph) to issue a warning to all motorists preparing to cross the Mackinac Bridge.

Examples of vehicles which are especially vulnerable to high winds are pickup trucks with campers, motor homes, vehicles pulling trailers and enclosed semi-truck trailers. Motorists are instructed to reduce their speed to a maximum of 20 miles per hour, turn on their four way flashers, and utilize the outside lane. Motorists are asked to exercise appropriate caution.

The Mackinac Bridge Authority is monitoring wind speeds at various points along the structure. Additional steps will be implemented if conditions change. If you are planning to travel to the Straits area, please tune to AM radio 530 or 1610 for updates.

Most places, when they create a system using EZPass (or any other compatible one) charge less per vehicle using it.

If the Bridge Authority thinks it would cost more to implement it, they could make the toll higher for using it. Although that would probably skew the results to the premise they evidently have: "See, no one uses it."

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:33:20 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:27:55 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:20:12 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:05:23 PMIt's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Great and imagine if there was all electronic tolling where people didn't have to stop at all. If you can do something to make it just that more efficient why not do it?

So stopping for a whole 5 seconds is going to matter?

Yes

No it's not, my whole point here is that I have driven over that bridge often enough to know that stopping for 5 seconds to pay a toll is not going to hold me up. It seems like all these ideas on this thread are coming from out of staters. My problem here is that you people seem like you don't believe the things I'm saying even though I have vast experience crossing the bridge.

Watch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

The number of crossings is highest in July and August every year and lowest in January and February. The peak volumes are about 20,000 VPD. Last year July had the highest crossings at 638,241 (20,588 a day). Last year February had the lowest crossings, so far this year January is the winner for lowest crossings (6,175 a day).

In the last ten years July 2021 had the highest crossings at 641,696 that month for an average of 20,699 daily. I saw earlier in this thread that someone mentioned 60,000 crossings daily in the peak months that number isn't even close to reality.

Quote from: GaryV on July 27, 2024, 06:14:27 PMMost places, when they create a system using EZPass (or any other compatible one) charge less per vehicle using it.

If the Bridge Authority thinks it would cost more to implement it, they could make the toll higher for using it. Although that would probably skew the results to the premise they evidently have: "See, no one uses it."

Or, just a thought, they could do what every normal tolling agency does and raise the rates for those paying directly at the booths while lowering the rates for those using MacPass/E-ZPass since it costs significantly more to pay people to take toll payments.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

I just remember Williamsville being a nightmare due to the two rows of toll-takers and no one moving up when they were supposed to, resulting in hoarse toll-takers yelling at people to do so all day and night.

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

Longer than it does paying cash. I find it stupid that people couldn't have $4 in cash on them to pay the toll instead of having to use a credit card.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 10:33:36 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

Longer than it does paying cash. I find it stupid that people couldn't have $4 in cash on them to pay the toll instead of having to use a credit card.

I find it stupid that people assume that people carry cash in this day and age.  Move into the 21st Century.

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 11:22:16 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 10:33:36 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

Longer than it does paying cash. I find it stupid that people couldn't have $4 in cash on them to pay the toll instead of having to use a credit card.

I find it stupid that people assume that people carry cash in this day and age.  Move into the 21st Century.

Lol what the hell ever. It's pretty well known that the toll on the Mackinac Bridge is $4, it's not that hard to have $4 available to pay the toll.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 11:55:36 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 11:22:16 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 10:33:36 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

Longer than it does paying cash. I find it stupid that people couldn't have $4 in cash on them to pay the toll instead of having to use a credit card.

I find it stupid that people assume that people carry cash in this day and age.  Move into the 21st Century.

Lol what the hell ever. It's pretty well known that the toll on the Mackinac Bridge is $4, it's not that hard to have $4 available to pay the toll.

Sure.  By credit card.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:18:38 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:33:20 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:27:55 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 04:20:12 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:05:23 PMIt's Saturday afternoon not a holiday weekend but a Summer weekend nonetheless. 4:00 in the afternoon at the Mackinac Bridge.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240727/b1d1798d236d0c82e9e70c295d4e6a34.jpg)

Great and imagine if there was all electronic tolling where people didn't have to stop at all. If you can do something to make it just that more efficient why not do it?

So stopping for a whole 5 seconds is going to matter?

Yes

No it's not, my whole point here is that I have driven over that bridge often enough to know that stopping for 5 seconds to pay a toll is not going to hold me up. It seems like all these ideas on this thread are coming from out of staters. My problem here is that you people seem like you don't believe the things I'm saying even though I have vast experience crossing the bridge.

While I don't live in MI anymore, I went to MTU and crossed the bridge dozens of times during college.  That said, I don't see why implementing ORT tolling, even if for just one lane, would hurt.  If you want to pay cash, fine.  But I don't see what's so horrible about giving people the option to drive through without having to stop, using a transponder that they can also already use on pretty much every other toll road.

I don't know. To be honest. I kinda like taking my time over the bridge. And its some of the best 4 bucks you can spend. So what if the toll booths take time, At least with this bridge you don't have bloody customs on both ends. Yeah want delays? Try all the other large bridges in the area (or the tunnel).

For me, I always just nab some 2 dollar bills from the bank when I head this way. Just hand a couple off when I go through. Takes no time most of the time, and most people tend to take their time going over the bridge anyway. Why not.. it is the 3rd longest suspension bridge in the country, and all the rest are on the ocean coasts.

It is totally a landmark structure.. stop and admire it.

When its cold out, you HAVE to take your time...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GQDjCGR7ck

Quote from: Moose on July 28, 2024, 01:31:23 AMWhen its cold out, you HAVE to take your time...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GQDjCGR7ck (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GQDjCGR7ck)

Bah. He could see. It was daytime with some breaks in the clouds.

My daughter and I crossed it when it was snowing, about 8 or 9 o'clock at night. All we saw was snowflakes coming at our windshield, and a little bit of bridge deck in front of us. Suddenly we passed the first tower. Then we saw a little bit of the cables coming down at the center of the bridge. But wait - we must have been going down - but it sure looked like we were still going up. All that swirling snow. I understood then why pilots crash their planes when their instruments tell them they should increase their altitude. To them, it looks like they were.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 01:19:37 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

I cross the bridge more than a few times a year more like about 60-70 times. I know the bridge pretty well. Why can't you people come to terms that the toll plaza isn't the reason for backups at the Mackinac Bridge?

Beacuse you haven't made a logical argument against a solution that could very well at least lessen the problem.

The problem is that it would cost a lot apparently, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't help.

Quote from: Moose on July 28, 2024, 01:31:23 AMI don't know. To be honest. I kinda like taking my time over the bridge. And its some of the best 4 bucks you can spend. So what if the toll booths take time, At least with this bridge you don't have bloody customs on both ends. Yeah want delays? Try all the other large bridges in the area (or the tunnel).

Quite a big area. :D

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 11:55:36 PMLol what the hell ever. It's pretty well known that the toll on the Mackinac Bridge is $4, it's not that hard to have $4 available to pay the toll.

Wow.  I think you overestimate how many people regularly use cash these days.  I keep a couple $20 bills on me just in case I can't use a card for something for whatever reason (and some Canadian bills I never used on my Montréal trip that I never bothered moving out of my wallet), but that's it.  I don't think breaking a $20 is the efficiency you had in mind.  What do you expect me to do, go to the bank and ask for four $1 bills (or two $2 bills) just for the bridge toll?  Yeah right.  Or I suppose I could use some of the leftover quarters I have from when I had to deal with coin-operated laundry.  I doubt that would help with efficiency, however.  And to think that many people my age and younger don't even bother carrying cash at all.

At this point you're coming across like an old guy ranting about "kids these days".

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:03:25 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

Well yeah.  If they don't like what you're saying and can't bully you away from expressing your point of view, then call for the thread to be locked.

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 28, 2024, 11:20:00 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:03:25 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

Well yeah.  If they don't like what you're saying and can't bully you away from expressing your point of view, then call for the thread to be locked.

I don't necessarily see it that way. This conversation just seems to be going in a circle.

Quote from: Moose on July 28, 2024, 01:31:23 AMI don't know. To be honest. I kinda like taking my time over the bridge. And its some of the best 4 bucks you can spend. So what if the toll booths take time, At least with this bridge you don't have bloody customs on both ends. Yeah want delays? Try all the other large bridges in the area (or the tunnel).

For me, I always just nab some 2 dollar bills from the bank when I head this way. Just hand a couple off when I go through. Takes no time most of the time, and most people tend to take their time going over the bridge anyway. Why not.. it is the 3rd longest suspension bridge in the country, and all the rest are on the ocean coasts.

It is totally a landmark structure.. stop and admire it.

When its cold out, you HAVE to take your time...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GQDjCGR7ck

You got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like congestion where I'm not expecting or really wanting to deal with it would be more aggravating. I've seen photos of massive crunches heading into Two Harbors, MN on MN 61 where the expressway ends and that would majorly suck to get caught in.

Quote from: Moose on July 28, 2024, 01:31:23 AMWhy not.. it is the 3rd longest suspension bridge in the country, and all the rest are on the ocean coasts.

Quote from: Moose on July 28, 2024, 01:31:23 AMWhy not.. it is the 3rd longest suspension bridge in the country, and all the rest are on the ocean coasts.

The Big Mac is the longest if you measure how much deck the bridge is suspended, which the Verrazzano-Narrows people successfully lobbied against to have the "longest" record reflect via main span only (aka between the towers), which is kinda cheating when one of the towers is essentially on land.

So in turn of total length being suspended:

Name	Total suspended (miles)	Main span only (miles)
Mackinac Bridge	1.59	0.72
Golden Gate	1.32	0.80
Verrazzano-Narrows	1.25	0.81

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 29, 2024, 02:50:06 AM

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 28, 2024, 11:20:00 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 04:03:25 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2024, 03:34:17 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 27, 2024, 03:30:39 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:33:34 AM"I cross the bridge a few times a year and oppose a measure that has reduced congestion everywhere else it has been implemented" is a weird flex.

When someone calls someone else out as a troll and then the alleged "victim" responds like this, maybe it's time to lock the thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely convinced that this person is a troll or trolling. But it is very bizarre to me how much energy they are putting to die on this hill. It's just strange to me.

Which is why I thought they were trolling by saying that an entirely voluntary HOT lane system (MNPass) had more of a reason to integrate into E-ZPass than a mandatory toll bridge that is a similar distance away from the E-ZPass network. It's just bizarre and illogical reasoning to me.

And here we go again with the EZPASS crap.

Let me put this very clearly

Interoperable. Tolling. System. That. Works. With. Any. Other. Toll. Pass.

It. Doesn't. Have. To. Be. EZPASS.

I put periods at the end of each word so you could stop and think about what they mean and we can quit going in circles with this conversation. I'm very much in agreement. It's about time this thread should be locked.

Lock this thread for what? Just because you don't agree?

Well yeah.  If they don't like what you're saying and can't bully you away from expressing your point of view, then call for the thread to be locked.

I don't necessarily see it that way. This conversation just seems to be going in a circle.

If you think that then why keep participating in a conversation that you think is either going nowhere or in a circle?  That would make you part of the problem, not the solution.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 29, 2024, 01:03:12 PMI feel like congestion where I'm not expecting or really wanting to deal with it would be more aggravating. I've seen photos of massive crunches heading into Two Harbors, MN on MN 61 where the expressway ends and that would majorly suck to get caught in.

Exactly—I could see a similar argument being made against traffic management in Two Harbors for the scenery, but MnDOT rearranged the turn lanes in Two Harbors anyway. It didn't completely eliminate the problem (it will never be fully eliminated unless they dust off plans for a Two Harbors bypass), but it is much less stressful to drive through now than it was before 2018. I envision a similar arrangement if more Michiganders adopt MacPass—not completely eliminating traffic, but making it more manageable and efficient on the busiest weekends.

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 29, 2024, 10:05:50 PM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on July 29, 2024, 01:03:12 PMI feel like congestion where I'm not expecting or really wanting to deal with it would be more aggravating. I've seen photos of massive crunches heading into Two Harbors, MN on MN 61 where the expressway ends and that would majorly suck to get caught in.

Exactly—I could see a similar argument being made against traffic management in Two Harbors for the scenery, but MnDOT rearranged the turn lanes in Two Harbors anyway. It didn't completely eliminate the problem (it will never be fully eliminated unless they dust off plans for a Two Harbors bypass), but it is much less stressful to drive through now than it was before 2018. I envision a similar arrangement if more Michiganders adopt MacPass—not completely eliminating traffic, but making it more manageable and efficient on the busiest weekends.

For sure. But my point was if I want to go sit in traffic I can just go hang out on Crosstown or 494 between 100 and Cedar at pretty much any time between 6 AM and 9 PM and it'll be crappy. I don't want to sit in it on 61, that's the whole point of why I'm up there. I've played the game enough to know when to go and when not to, but sitting in horrific backups kind of defeats the purpose of being in vacation world.

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Quote from: vdeane on July 30, 2024, 12:43:44 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Well in northern Michigan driving exactly the speed limit is not considered slow. In areas where at warrants a higher speed I do go a little faster but not on the Mackinac Bridge.

With kphoger absent from the forum, let's see if I can pull this off with equivalent flair...

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

QuoteWhich also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:59:31 PMOh and #226 was attempting to attack me as well

How do you know he was referring to you and not the city? After all, the city has plenty of bigger problems to be concerned about than EZPass interoperability on the Mackinac bridge. 

:bigass:

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 02:20:11 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 30, 2024, 12:43:44 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Well in northern Michigan driving exactly the speed limit is not considered slow. In areas where at warrants a higher speed I do go a little faster but not on the Mackinac Bridge.

I frequently get passed like I'm standing still when I go 70 on M-28 and US 2. People do obey the limit on the Mac, though.

When my son went to Michigan Tech, a father of an older student told me, "Never ask them how long it took to get home. Because they might tell you."

Quote from: webny99 on July 30, 2024, 03:24:49 PMWith kphoger absent from the forum, let's see if I can pull this off with equivalent flair...

Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 26, 2024, 12:39:05 PM

QuoteWhich also begs the question why the Michigan Tourism Department, various chambers of commerce, and other business interests in the UP haven't put the pressure on the MBA to adopt a better business model for the MacPass at the very least, if not start doing ETC and accepting E-ZPass. People's vacations becoming a traffic nightmare benefits no one.

Because Flint runs the MBA.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 26, 2024, 10:59:31 PMOh and #226 was attempting to attack me as well

How do you know he was referring to you and not the city? After all, the city has plenty of bigger problems to be concerned about than EZPass interoperability on the Mackinac bridge. 

:bigass:

Lol. He might have been for all I know. That city is a thing of beauty.

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 30, 2024, 03:43:59 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 02:20:11 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 30, 2024, 12:43:44 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Well in northern Michigan driving exactly the speed limit is not considered slow. In areas where at warrants a higher speed I do go a little faster but not on the Mackinac Bridge.

I frequently get passed like I'm standing still when I go 70 on M-28 and US 2. People do obey the limit on the Mac, though.

I do about 75 when I'm on 2 or 28.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 06:01:11 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 30, 2024, 03:43:59 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 02:20:11 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 30, 2024, 12:43:44 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Well in northern Michigan driving exactly the speed limit is not considered slow. In areas where at warrants a higher speed I do go a little faster but not on the Mackinac Bridge.

I frequently get passed like I'm standing still when I go 70 on M-28 and US 2. People do obey the limit on the Mac, though.

I do about 75 when I'm on 2 or 28.

So 65 is slow then? :-P

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 30, 2024, 07:11:11 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 06:01:11 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 30, 2024, 03:43:59 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 02:20:11 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 30, 2024, 12:43:44 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:24:01 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

You aren't getting close to anything here. The speed limit is 45 mph on the bridge, I drive 45 mph. How would I be the reason for any congestion?

Dear lord, I said "heart of the opposition", not "heart of the congestion".  Are you viewing those of us who are pro-interoperability (with E-ZPass and/or anything else) as a monolith?

That said, out east, driving exactly the speed limit is considered slow.  I usually drive 5-7 over and still get passed like I'm standing still on any multi-lane bridge with a speed limit in that range.

Well in northern Michigan driving exactly the speed limit is not considered slow. In areas where at warrants a higher speed I do go a little faster but not on the Mackinac Bridge.

I frequently get passed like I'm standing still when I go 70 on M-28 and US 2. People do obey the limit on the Mac, though.

I do about 75 when I'm on 2 or 28.

So 65 is slow then? :-P

No I wouldn't say it's slow it's just the speed limit, it seems like the speed limit is just a suggestion in Michigan. It's probably a lot of travelers that drive like that, I don't think locals in that area drive that fast. If I'm alone on a highway I'll generally do the speed limit but if I'm in traffic or have someone to follow I'll go with the flow.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMNow, what the out-of-staters don't get. AET/ETC will not eliminate congestion at the bridge. Full stop. Much of this year's congestion is based on construction bottlenecks. You have a four-lane bridge that's effectively a two-lane bridge much of the time. Prime tourist traffic season is prime construction season. There's almost always a full or partial lane closed in each direction. When the trucks have a 20 mph speed limit and a lane is closed, the bridge backs up some. That is a fact of life. That's not even counting the times when they have to reduce speed limits or even implement escorts due to high winds. Sometimes, they even have to close the bridge completely due to winds or other weather.

Not mentioned: the Bridge Walk on Labor Day, which is massively popular and completely shuts down the bridge for much of the day, then is jammed with Bridge Walkers trying to leave. So yes, there are other sources of congestion.

Also true is that on Fridays and Sundays on at least some summer weekends, with no construction taking place on or near the bridge, there's simply an overwhelming traffic demand, and the toll booths are the choke point.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMThe MBA has studied expanding MacPass and joining E-ZPass. For the authority, the economics don't seem to work for them. All of the armchair pontificating here will not replace that determination. They know the specifics on why it would cost too much for them to implement absent an actual requirement to do so. I'm sure that they continue to evaluate the situation, and if things change, they will make a change.

This. It works only as long as there's an open lane for transponder holders to pass through (when it backs up enough to clog both lanes outside of the toll booth apron, that transponder does nothing). You also need enough of them to actually improve throughput through the toll booths.

Quote from: bulldog1979 on July 27, 2024, 02:05:48 PMThe toll takers were waiting for the traffic to clear the lanes to have the next vehicle approach; traffic was not waiting for the person in the booth.

I'm taking this quote slightly out of its context to highlight that it's not the toll takers, but the drivers - many of them in vacation mode and oblivious - that are a main cause of slow throughput through the gates.

Quote from: Rothman on July 27, 2024, 10:30:52 PM

Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2024, 10:12:36 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 27, 2024, 06:23:23 PMWatch how long this transaction takes using a credit card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8DOIrqjkg

Doesn't seem that long, even with all the time taken to get the receipt.  When my parents were still paying cash on the Thruway, most people we'd be stuck behind in line took long enough that it almost felt like clearing customs.

I just remember Williamsville being a nightmare due to the two rows of toll-takers and no one moving up when they were supposed to, resulting in hoarse toll-takers yelling at people to do so all day and night.

The cash payment is considerably quicker. So are the tap-to-pay schemes elsewhere. Still, it takes longer for the driver to move their vehicle than it takes the payment to process.

So at best, we're moving maybe 3 to 4 cars a minute though each gate. There's at best 5 toll booths that can be open now, with 3 for the opposing direction. So at best, in one direction they can move 20 cars a minute through the booths, or 1200 cars an hour. The other direction is capped at 720 cars per hour.

That *sounds* like it should be enough, but in the video I posted to start this discussion, it clearly wasn't. Again, no construction. Just a long 4th of July holiday weekend.

Quote from: GaryV on July 30, 2024, 03:55:25 PMWhen my son went to Michigan Tech, a father of an older student told me, "Never ask them how long it took to get home. Because they might tell you."

My personal best Houghton-to-Lansing trip was 7 1/2 hours - and that was with a posted 55 through the U.P. and I-75 and US-127 just having been raised to 70. I kept it down on the Seney Stretch and on US-2, because the State Police were waiting to pounce.

This topic actually came up in a Facebook group that I'm in. The group is called Mackinac Bridge Views and a view of a backed up Mackinac Bridge this past Sunday showed up. The backup was believe it or not heading in the NB direction on a Sunday. People that were in that mess on the bridge stated that things moved rather quickly and within 15 minutes the backup was gone.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 09:54:21 AMThis topic actually came up in a Facebook group that I'm in. The group is called Mackinac Bridge Views and a view of a backed up Mackinac Bridge this past Sunday showed up. The backup was believe it or not heading in the NB direction on a Sunday. People that were in that mess on the bridge stated that things moved rather quickly and within 15 minutes the backup was gone.

Right, so congestion isn't an issue.

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Pot meet kettle.

Quote from: Rothman on July 31, 2024, 04:43:15 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 09:54:21 AMThis topic actually came up in a Facebook group that I'm in. The group is called Mackinac Bridge Views and a view of a backed up Mackinac Bridge this past Sunday showed up. The backup was believe it or not heading in the NB direction on a Sunday. People that were in that mess on the bridge stated that things moved rather quickly and within 15 minutes the backup was gone.

Right, so congestion isn't an issue.

Not when it's cleared in 15 minutes nope can't say it's an on going issue. I-75 is loaded from Detroit to anywhere Up North on summer weekends, the Mackinac Bridge is part of that. So if I-75 backsup due to a lot of northbound traffic and there isn't a toll booth to blame then what's the problem there? I-75 is the Main Street of Michigan, it's a very busy highway so tell me what the solution is there? And if you say add a lane or something like that then it'll be overkill for most of the year and not needed.

Quote from: Terry Shea on July 31, 2024, 05:58:06 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Pot meet kettle.

Yep gotta get a reply from the know it all's I guess.

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Sorry, Mr. Michiganian!

Please note that I prefer to be called a Maverick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Mavericks) rather than a Minnesotan. If Indiana can have their demonym based on a sports team, so can everyone else!  ;-)

Quote from: Molandfreak on August 01, 2024, 09:24:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Sorry, Mr. Michiganian!

Please note that I prefer to be called a Maverick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Mavericks) rather than a Minnesotan. If Indiana can have their demonym based on a sports team, so can everyone else!  ;-)

I just don't like that a certain governor took it upon himself to decide what we are called and signed a bill for it. We had always been called Michiganians and this bozo comes along and signs some bill making Michigananders the term. Michiganians sounds better anyway.

Quote from: Molandfreak on August 01, 2024, 09:24:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Sorry, Mr. Michiganian!

Please note that I prefer to be called a Maverick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Mavericks) rather than a Minnesotan. If Indiana can have their demonym based on a sports team, so can everyone else!  ;-)

If that is the case, it would apply to Texas for the Dallas NBA team.

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 01, 2024, 09:45:50 AM

Quote from: Molandfreak on August 01, 2024, 09:24:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Sorry, Mr. Michiganian!

Please note that I prefer to be called a Maverick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Mavericks) rather than a Minnesotan. If Indiana can have their demonym based on a sports team, so can everyone else!  ;-)

I just don't like that a certain governor took it upon himself to decide what we are called and signed a bill for it. We had always been called Michiganians and this bozo comes along and signs some bill making Michigananders the term. Michiganians sounds better anyway.

Ganders are lovely birds, they eat dandelions from our gardens. You should take it as a compliment!

What's good for the Michigoose is good for the Michigander.



^Sorry.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 01, 2024, 05:42:13 PMWhat's good for the Michigoose is good for the Michigander.

And therein is part of the problem.

I'm old enough to have grown up with Michigander. But then someone saw that "gander" part and thought it was sexist, so the push was on to change it to Michiganian. Which sounded strange to those of us who had grown up with Michigander.

Now I guess the push is back toward Michigander?

Edit: Let's just call ourselves Yoopers and Trolls and be done with it. Oh wait, that congestion thing again ......

Hey, I'd say a good laugh improves your life a lot more than getting stuck in traffic while you're in vacation country! :-P

Quote from: Molandfreak on August 01, 2024, 10:05:13 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on August 01, 2024, 09:45:50 AM

Quote from: Molandfreak on August 01, 2024, 09:24:29 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

Sorry, Mr. Michiganian!

Please note that I prefer to be called a Maverick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_State_Mavericks) rather than a Minnesotan. If Indiana can have their demonym based on a sports team, so can everyone else!  ;-)

I just don't like that a certain governor took it upon himself to decide what we are called and signed a bill for it. We had always been called Michiganians and this bozo comes along and signs some bill making Michigananders the term. Michiganians sounds better anyway.

Ganders are lovely birds, they eat dandelions from our gardens. You should take it as a compliment!

Lewis Cass, one of our early governors, was called the "great Michigander" by Rep. Abraham Lincoln, and it was considered an insult at the time to imply that Cass was a silly as a goose. From that usage, it's been considered a pejorative by many.

In a bill to modernize the Michigan Historical Commission, a reference to "Michiganian" was changed to "Michigander", although the federal government uses the latter as our demonym.

According to the Federal Government we are Michiganians. I don't like either Rick Snyder or Gretchen Whitmer and they both use Michigander so I don't.

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 31, 2024, 11:51:04 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 07:01:53 AM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 30, 2024, 12:28:04 AM

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2024, 12:07:35 AM

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2024, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: Flint1979 on July 29, 2024, 10:29:08 AMYou got that right. Out of all the times I cross the bridge I take my time and enjoy the views. If I get stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of the bridge I'm in the best place on Earth right smack between Michigan's two peninsulas. I love it.

I feel like we're getting closer to the heart of the opposition here.

...and another reason for the congestion.

Not even close to a reason for the congestion, driving 45 mph on a bridge with a speed limit of 45 mph is not another reason for the congestion. You are wrong.

My word, you just fight people on every little thing. :D

Yep and one of the littlest things I would argue over is I hate the term Michiganders to refer to us and prefer Michiganians which has always been the term to refer to us. We don't need a Governor signing anything into law telling us what we're going to be called. The real answer though is we're both.

How many times are you going to quote my post? :D