Is congestion really worth trying to tackle?

Or at least, how much effort should we be putting into that. It seems like a big part of the justification Metrolinks is using to try to sell the Big Move is to fight congestion.

However, if you actually look at the projections, we'd be spending $50 billion on transit (just capital expenditures afaik) and have almost no decrease in congestion. Supposedly, this is to prevent things from getting worse. But will they really get that much worse if we do nothing?

Imagine we stopped all construction of new transportation infrastructure, both roads and transit. Over the next 30 years, the GTA's population is supposed to grow by about 50%, so since we're not building new roads into greenfields, this means the GTA will get 50% denser, both in terms of residential and job density. In order to prevent congestion from getting worse*, people will have to decrease the distance they drive by 33%. Who knows, maybe rising gasoline prices would have caused that to happen anyways. However, since the density went up 50%, that pretty much cancels out the effect of having a smaller driving range (in terms of land area) because the amount of stuff within that driving range will have increased.

It could be similar for transit, people will just use it less (or change where they live) if it gets crowded, maybe more people will more from North York to Downtown and the people living in North York will be the people working in North York.

If we invest in transit, and that causes some people to take transit instead of driving, that will decrease congestion, causing more people to drive... So overall, I don't think transit investments will have a very large impact on transit congestion, just like widening highways also has little effect.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't be investment in new transportation infrastructure, especially transit, but spending tens of billions with the goal of fighting congestion seems like a waste. There are still other goals that might be worthwhile though, like improving transit to encourage people to have fewer cars (which often means one car instead of 2 or 3), which could lead to either less private debt, or more private spending on other things that might be better for the economy. There's also concerns about resiliency in the face of peak oil, and environmental concerns.

*This is a related point, how much worse can congestion get in Toronto? I'm pretty sure that if congestion gets worse, people will just drive less, mitigating much of the increase in congestion.

The same report that says the big move will merely maintain commuting times also says that if we don't invest commute time will go up by about a half hour every day.

innsertnamehere said:

The same report that says the big move will merely maintain commuting times also says that if we don't invest commute time will go up by about a half hour every day.

Click to expand...

Do you know what the extra half hour is based on? Does it take into account that people will inevitably change where they live, work and shop, and that congestion will lead to increases in density since things will have to be closer?

I think that, just to have more options for commuting, that alone, will make the big move worth it.

Good question, Memph.

As long as roads are free to use, there will always be congestion. Reducing congestion is a silly reason to expand public transit but, luckily, there are a lot of meaningful reasons to do so. The most meaningful reason I can think of, apart from the health and economic benefits to individuals of not driving, is that an extensive public transit system provides alternative ways for people to reach their destinations. This does not, in itself, reduce congestion, since the road capacity that was vacated by people who switch to mass transit will be gobbled up by people who use the free roadspace to drive, but it at least gives people options that were not previously available.

Now if we want to get serious about tackling congestion there is one way that we could do it that would cost almost nothing: road tolling. Of course, we would need to provide an alternative for people who need to travel but can't/won't pay tolls and that would be public transit.

Roads aren't just for moving commuters. Businesses, especially transport ones, rely on good transportation to move from A to B. They don't have any options and that leads to MUCH lower productivity as businesses cannot rely on timely deliveries and have to pay high wages for truckers who sit in traffic. Many people also require their cars for work and there are tourisits and people in the rest of the province that have to you Toronto as their regional centre but are way out out of transit service area even if it was viable.

There are some very simply and cost effective things that can be done to assist and encourage car pooling or transit and that is HOV lanes. Of course that requires political will and we know that there is a shocking lack of that.

How will HOV lanes help with deliveries/truckers? Or are you suggesting to allow trucks into HOV lanes? Although I agree that freight needs to be able to move easily, it would be nice if the more regional/inter-regional trips could shift at least in part to freight rail.

Tolls could help the highways move more smoothly so it's worth looking into, although I'm not sure what the truckers will think of them, and I don't think it would be feasible to have them on arterials, where congestion might be even worse.

it will be efficient just to make commuting to downtow by car a lot more expensive, especially during rush hour. Tolling and DVP and Gardiner by $5 each direction will be a good start.

Providing more transit may not make traffic much better, as pointed out, it encourages driving since there seem to be fewer cars. People respond to montary loss way more than loss of time. 20 more minutes, big deal. $10 per day, now they start to think.

North Americans will always prefer to drive their own cars, even when transit is convenient. Well, who doesn't? You just have to make driving unaffordable, then they will cut driving time and make the sensible decision to live closer to work instead of 30km away.

Memph said:

Imagine we stopped all construction of new transportation infrastructure, both roads and transit. Over the next 30 years, the GTA's population is supposed to grow by about 50%, so since we're not building new roads into greenfields, this means the GTA will get 50% denser, both in terms of residential and job density.

Click to expand...

I don't think the assumption can be made that the GTA would get denser if there is no transportation improvements. As small a commute as people may have to work, those work places will presumably do business with other businesses beyond the neighbourhood. If the congestion is unbearable in the core then jobs will locate on the fringes, if it is unbearable there they may move to another city entirely. At some point it just isn't worth doing business here. It is GO transit improvements that have allowed downtown to grow.

They talk about congestion because it is a problem a lot of people can relate to, but I agree that there isn't much that can be done to reduce it.

The goal of planning as it relates to transportation ought to be, and probably is, about getting people to live closer to where they work (moving into condos downtown) and using modes of transportation that have a neutral or positive impact on the environment and on the community. IMO the worst thing about cars is the way they dehumanize us - on the road we're all just metal boxes - and alter the landscape of the city to be unfriendly to pedestrians. As they say, we're all pedestrians when we get out of the car. I'd rather be getting out of my car on Queen West than in a vast shopping centre parking lot.

Ford blasts parking ticket increase as 'cash grab'


See link.

Mayor Rob Ford slammed the city’s looming parking ticket increase for curb hogs as a “cash grab.” Ford made the comment Monday — a day before Public Works chairman Denzil Minnan-Wong is set to announce the hike as part of the city’s “Reducing Traffic Congestion Parking Regulations Program.”

City councillors approved the changes in February 2012 in a 24-1 vote — around 20 council members were absent at the time, including Mayor Ford.

Under the changes, the fine for parking in a no-parking zone or stopping in a no-standing zone will jump to $150 — the current fine is $40 for a no-parking violation and $60 for a no-stopping/no-standing violation.

The actual rush-hour period will also be expanded to 6 a.m.- 10 a.m. during the morning rush and 3 p.m.-7 p.m. in the afternoon.

But Ford balked at the changes.

“That’s a cash grab if you ask me,” he said Monday. “I’m still trying to figure out where that got buried.

“I think we have to penalize the people if they park, I have no problem.”

Ford hinted that one of his motions to lower the tax rate in the 2014 budget will direct staff to collect around $3 million in outstanding parking tickets rather than write them off.

“But to increase the fines and tow away the car if you have three parking tickets?” Ford said. “Unless they are going to send a letter to you ... that’s going to cost a lot of money to do that.”

He argued that increasing the length of rush hour, and the rush-hour provisions in place on roads, will “make people go through side streets” and neighbourhoods.

“It’s going to hurt businesses, unfortunately,” Ford said.

Councillor Josh Matlow — who has been waging war against delivery vehicles and other curb hogs for years — welcomed the changes as a way to combat gridlock.

“This isn’t about small, quiet neighbourhood streets where a car might be parked a little too long,” he said.

He argued it is unfair that other drivers are inconvenienced when one “selfish yahoo” parks illegally in curb lanes on main streets during rush hour to pick up a coffee or drop something off.

Click to expand...

BTW. Guess who might print the decals that could cover the old parking signs with the new times? Would you believe, Deco Labels, the printing business owned by the Ford brothers. Crocodile tears?

W. K. Lis said:

Ford blasts parking ticket increase as 'cash grab'


See link.



BTW. Guess who might print the decals that could cover the old parking signs with the new times? Would you believe, Deco Labels, the printing business owned by the Ford brothers. Crocodile tears?

Click to expand...

LOL. On the one hand he blames streetcars for congestion. Yet delivery trucks which block half the road on major streets during rush hour every single morning should not be fined. This happens every day at Yonge & Eglinton, this morning I saw about 4 trucks & vans parked on Eglinton.

I wonder how much Brinks paid the Fords.

Johnny Au said:

I wonder how much Brinks paid the Fords.

Click to expand...

Nothing.

Ford Nation wants a solution to congestion that doesn't inconvenience them. No parking rules, trams, buses, pedestrians, and numerous other things inconvenience them.

What they really want is a Chicago double-decker street grid solution; but paid for by somebody else. Those are the people he listens to most.

ehlow said:

LOL. On the one hand he blames streetcars for congestion. Yet delivery trucks which block half the road on major streets during rush hour every single morning should not be fined. This happens every day at Yonge & Eglinton, this morning I saw about 4 trucks & vans parked on Eglinton.

Click to expand...

Logic and psychosis don't usually work well together.